The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Physics-constrained deep learning for high-dimensional surrogate modeling and uncertainty quantification without labeled data
Open accessAbstract
Abstract Surrogate modeling and uncertainty quantification tasks for PDE systems are most often considered as supervised learning problems where input and output data pairs are used for training. The construction of such emulators is by definition a small data problem which poses challenges to deep learning approaches that have been developed to operate in the big data regime. Even in cases where such models have been shown to have good predictive capability in high dimensions, they fail to address constraints in the data implied by the PDE model. This paper provides a methodology that incorporates the governing equations of the physical model in the loss/likelihood functions. The resulting physics-constrained, deep learning models are trained without any labeled data (e.g. employing only input data) and provide comparable predictive responses with data-driven models while obeying the constraints of the problem at hand. This work employs a convolutional encoder-decoder neural network approach as well as a conditional flow-based generative model for the solution of PDEs, surrogate model construction, and uncertainty quantification tasks. The methodology is posed as a minimization problem of the reverse Kullback-Leibler (KL) divergence between the model predictive density and the reference conditional density, where the later is defined as the Boltzmann-Gibbs distribution at a given inverse temperature with the underlying potential relating to the PDE system of interest. The generalization capability of these models to out-of-distribution input is considered. Quantification and interpretation of the predictive uncertainty is provided for a number of problems.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentation
Ronneberger, O., Fischer, P., & Brox, T. (2015) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-24574-4_28 · Cited by 99,404
BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding
Devlin, J., Chang, M.-W., Lee, K., & Toutanova, K. (2018) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1810.04805 · Cited by 73,173
Densely Connected Convolutional Networks
Huang, G., Liu, Z., Van Der Maaten, L., & Weinberger, K. Q. (2017) · 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2017.243 · Cited by 48,566
Unpaired image-to-image translation using cycle-consistent adversarial networks
Zhu, J.-Y., Park, T., Isola, P., & Efros, A. A. (2017) · 2017 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) · doi:10.1109/iccv.2017.244 · Cited by 23,602
Raissi, M., Perdikaris, P., & Karniadakis, G. E. (2019) · Journal of Computational Physics · doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2018.10.045 · Cited by 20,384
Self-citationConditional Generative Adversarial Nets
Mirza, M., & Osindero, S. (2014) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1411.1784 · Cited by 8,863
Model-Agnostic Meta-Learning for Fast Adaptation of Deep Networks
Finn, C., Abbeel, P., & Levine, S. (2017) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1703.03400 · Cited by 8,512
Dropout as a bayesian approximation: Representing model uncertainty in deep learning
Gal, Y., & Ghahramani, Z. (2015) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1506.02142 · Cited by 6,471
On calibration of modern neural networks
Guo, C., Pleiss, G., Sun, Y., & Weinberger, K. Q. (2017) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1706.04599 · Cited by 3,435
A practical Bayesian framework for backpropagation networks
MacKay, D. J. C. (1992) · Neural Computation · doi:10.1162/neco.1992.4.3.448 · Cited by 2,917
Cited by
Physics-informed machine learning
Karniadakis, G. E., Kevrekidis, I. G., Lu, L., Perdikaris, P., Wang, S., & Yang, L. (2021) · Nature Reviews Physics · doi:10.1038/s42254-021-00314-5 · Cited by 8,718
Self-citationLearning nonlinear operators via DeepONet based on the universal approximation theorem of operators
Lu, L., Jin, P., Pang, G., Zhang, Z., & Karniadakis, G. E. (2021) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-021-00302-5 · Cited by 3,418
A review of uncertainty quantification in deep learning: Techniques, applications and challenges
Abdar, M., Pourpanah, F., Hussain, S., Rezazadegan, D., Liu, L., Ghavamzadeh, M., Fieguth, P., Cao, X., Khosravi, A., Acharya, U. R., et al. (2021) · Information Fusion · doi:10.1016/j.inffus.2021.05.008 · Cited by 3,111
“[392] devised a physics-constrained deep learning model for high-dimensional UQ and surrogate modeling without labeled data.”
BackgroundInterpretable machine learning: Fundamental principles and 10 grand challenges
Rudin, C., Chen, C., Chen, Z., Huang, H., Semenova, L., & Zhong, C. (2022) · Statistics Surveys · doi:10.1214/21-ss133 · Cited by 958
Eighty Years of the Finite Element Method: Birth, Evolution, and Future
Liu, W. K., Li, S., & Park, H. S. (2022) · Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering · doi:10.1007/s11831-022-09740-9 · Cited by 322
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhu, Y., Zabaras, N., Koutsourelakis, P.-S., & Perdikaris, P.
- Venue
- Journal of Computational Physics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-10
- Volume
- 394
- Pages
- 56-81
- ISSN
- 0021-9991 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2908541468
- Cited by
- 1,030
- References
- 14
- FWCI
- 46.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Physics-constrained deep learning for high-dimensional surrogate modeling and uncertainty quantification without labeled data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jcp.2019.05.024
- The paper
- Zhu, Y., Zabaras, N., Koutsourelakis, P.-S., & Perdikaris, P. (2019). Physics-constrained deep learning for high-dimensional surrogate modeling and uncertainty quantification without labeled data. Journal of Computational Physics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2019.05.024
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.