The paper introduces the Physics-Informed Stochastic Configuration Machine (PI‑SCM), a backpropagation‑free neural network designed for solving nonlinear differential equations. By analytically evaluating local Jacobians, PI‑SCM linearizes the physical loss, enabling optimal weight determination through generalized linear least squares and avoiding iterative nonlinear optimization. The authors present a progressive algorithmic suite—PI‑SC‑I, PI‑SC‑II, and PI‑SC‑III—prove their universal approximation properties, and show through experiments that PI‑SCM achieves high‑fidelity predictions and parameter identification while accelerating training by orders of magnitude compared to standard PINNs.
By Yuehao Song (School of Automation, Central South University, Changsha, China), Zhong Chen (School of Automation, Central South University, Changsha, China), Lihui Cen (School of Automation, Central South University, Changsha, China), Liang Wu (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA), Kai Zhang (State Key Laboratory of Simulation and Regulation of Water Cycle in River Basin, China Institute of Water Resources and Hydropower Research, Beijing, China)
arXiv:2606. 19754v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Partial differential equations (PDEs) play a central role in modeling complex physical, biological, and engineering systems.
By Zhiwen Yu, Derong Yang, Liujian Zhang, Kaixiang Yang, Peilin Zhan, Jianmin Lv, Jane You, C. L. Philip Chen
arXiv:2606. 12337v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Inverse problems governed by partial differential equations (PDEs) are central to computational mechanics and are commonly solved by adjoint-based optimization, while physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) have emerged as a flexible alternative.
By Zhen Zhang, Alessandro Alla, George Em Karniadakis
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
The paper introduces a linearized Physics-Informed Neural Network (lPINN), a reduced‑order neural basis approach for solving forward and inverse differential equations. In an offline phase, lPINN learns continuous, differentiable neural basis functions from numerical solutions, which are then frozen for new problem instances; the online solution is obtained by minimizing the governing‑equation residual with additional constraints. Experiments on advection‑diffusion, Burgers', and nonlinear pendulum equations show that lPINN achieves lower solution and parameter errors than vanilla PINNs while reducing online inference times by up to three orders of magnitude, and its continuous representation generalizes to finer meshes without retraining.
By Wenhao Chen, Alexandre M. Tartakovsky
arXiv:2607. 02194v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) have emerged as a promising route to solve partial differential equations, yet they have struggled to reach the precision of classical solvers.
By Joseph Webb, Sadok Jerad, Coralia Cartis
Gen-PINNs introduces a deterministic residual-adversarial framework that combines Generative Adversarial Networks with Physics-Informed Neural Networks to solve partial differential equations. The method addresses limitations of standard PINNs—such as spectral bias, loss imbalance, and optimizer stagnation—by using a generator that learns the PDE solution with dynamically weighted physics-informed losses and discriminators that assess residuals against zero-residual states. Experiments on nonlinear and higher-order PDEs (Burgers, Allen‑Cahn, Kuramoto‑Sivashinsky) show significant gains in accuracy and convergence, especially for sharp-front, stiff, and high-order problems.
By Muhammad M. Akmal, Kamy Sepehrnoori, Michael J. Pyrcz
arXiv:2608. 05892v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) often fail to accurately resolve partial differential equations (PDEs) with high-frequency or multi-scale solutions, as well as strongly nonlinear problems.
By Yulun Wu, Matthieu Barreau, Miguel Aguiar, Karl H. Johansson
arXiv:2606. 18175v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We present a numerical method for the forward solution of nonlinear partial differential equations (PDEs) in which Bellman-Kalaba quasilinearization reduces the nonlinear problem to a sequence of linear subproblems, each discretized by collocation onto a trial space that is linear in its parameters and solved by a single direct linear least-squares QR factorization.
By Gbenga T. Awojinrin, Abdul-Akeem Olawoyin, Rami M. Younis
arXiv:2607. 25608v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) have emerged as a powerful paradigm for solving partial differential equations (PDEs) by embedding governing physical laws into deep neural networks.
By Pinki Khatun, M. Sajid, Abhinav Jha, M. Tanveer
arXiv:2607. 24726v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The Deep Galerkin Method (DGM) and Physics Informed Neural Networks (PINNs) have become widely-used methods for solving partial differential equations (PDEs) in the rapidly growing field of scientific machine learning.
By Justin Sirignano, Konstantinos Spiliopoulos, Samuel Cohen
arXiv:2601. 00473v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: We revisit the analogy between feed-forward deep neural networks (DNNs) and discrete dynamical systems derived from neural integral equations and their corresponding partial differential equation (PDE) forms.
By Abhisek Ganguly, Santosh Ansumali, Sauro Succi