The paper explores global sensitivity analysis (GSA) when both physics-based models and experimental data are available, focusing on physics-informed machine learning to improve sensitivity estimates. It evaluates two ML approaches—deep neural networks (DNN) and Gaussian processes (GP)—and two physics integration strategies: physics-constrained loss functions and sequential pre‑training with simulation followed by experimental fine‑tuning. Four models per ML type are constructed, incorporating model uncertainties into Sobol index calculations, and results show DNNs yield tighter sensitivity bounds than GP models, demonstrated on additive manufacturing and lake temperature examples.
By Berkcan Kapusuzoglu, Sankaran Mahadevan
The article explores physics-informed and hybrid machine learning approaches for predicting bond quality and porosity in fused filament fabrication (FFF) parts. It examines three strategies—embedding physics constraints in the loss function, adding physics model outputs as inputs, and pre‑training with physics data—to enforce consistency with physical laws. Eight combinations of these strategies are tested, showing that integrating multiple approaches yields accurate predictions even with limited experimental data.
By Berkcan Kapusuzoglu, Sankaran Mahadevan
arXiv:2606. 11605v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Predicting process-property relationships in manufacturing is often challenged by high experimental costs and the limited interpretability of complex 'black-box' models.
By Ge Song, Kiarash Naghavi Khanghah, Anandkumar Patel, Rajiv Malhotra, Hongyi Xu
arXiv:2606. 28519v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Training operator-learning models for large-scale problems governed by partial differential equations (PDEs) is challenging due to the curse of dimensionality, memory constraints, and limited training data.
By Christian Munoz, Alexandre Tartakovsky
arXiv:2607. 07863v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: In physically dominated machining processes, experimental datasets are small, expensive, and material-specific; in this regime, data curation, evaluation design, and the form of physics integration can matter as much as the learning algorithm.
By Sarah Grewe, J\"org Frochte
arXiv:2502. 07209v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Physics-Informed Neural Networks (PINNs) seek to solve partial differential equations (PDEs) with deep learning.
By Shaghayegh Fazliani, Zachary Frangella, Madeleine Udell
arXiv:2607. 04450v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Integral codes like the Accident Source Term Evaluation Code (ASTEC) are powerful tools to study the physics of Severe Accidents (SAs) in nuclear reactors.
By Alessandro Longhi, Danny Lathouwers, Zolt\'an Perk\'o
Physics-Informed Error Field Learning (PIEFL) is a post‑training optimization framework for Physics‑Informed Neural Networks (PINNs). After a primary network reaches satisfactory accuracy, PIEFL introduces an auxiliary error network that learns the discrepancy between the current approximation and the exact solution by deriving error control equations under physical constraints. The learned error correction is then combined with the primary prediction, improving solution accuracy without modifying the primary network architecture and focusing computational resources on correcting existing prediction errors.
By Jiuyun Sun, Yong Zhang
arXiv:2606. 01179v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Entropy production governs irreversibility and uncertainty in both physical and information-theoretic systems.
By Biswajeet Sahoo, Debadutta Patra
arXiv:2609.07437v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) represent a growing frontier in using artificial intelligence to solve partial differential equations (PDEs)...
By Xing Guo, Hongwei Tang, Zewei Meng, Yidong Zhang, Shaoqiu Xiao, Feng Liu
The paper introduces a Physics Informed Recurrent Neural Network (PIRNN) that simultaneously predicts target time series and unobservable intermediate physical variables, enhancing robustness and interpretability. It adapts to any physical model with multiple equations and variables, demonstrated on groundwater level predictions using the Gardenia model. Experiments on twelve real‑world datasets show PIRNN outperforming several neural network baselines and the Gardenia model, with an ablation study confirming the value of physical knowledge.
By Etienne Lehembre (CA, LIFO), Pascal Audigane (BRGM), Vincent Nguyen (LIFO), Christel Vrain (LIFO, CA), Thi-Bich-Hanh Dao (LIFO, CA)
The paper evaluates the robustness of Physics‑Informed Neural Networks (PINNs) against noisy data in inverse problems, comparing them to a finite element method (FEM) plus optimizer baseline. Experiments on viscosity identification in 1D Burgers’ equation and 2D/3D Taylor‑Green Vortex with additive Gaussian noise show that PINNs, while requiring less human expertise, are outperformed by the traditional FEM approach in accuracy (e.g., RMSE 0.01 vs. 0.0013 for 2D Taylor‑Green with σ=1). PINNs do, however, exhibit better scaling with problem complexity, and the study highlights specific training failures that must be addressed for PINNs to become more competitive.
By Aleksandra Jekic, Afroditi Natsaridou, Signe Riemer-S{\o}rensen, Helge Langseth, Odd Erik Gundersen