Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 299

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Physics-Guided Machine Learning for Scientific Discovery: An Application in Simulating Lake Temperature Profiles

Open access
Jia, Xiaowei, Willard, Jared, Karpatne, Anuj, Read, Jordan S., Zwart, Jacob A., Steinbach, Michael, Kumar, Vipin·2021·ACM/IMS Transactions on Data Science

Abstract

Physics-based models are often used to study engineering and environmental systems. The ability to model these systems is the key to achieving our future environmental sustainability and improving the quality of human life. This article focuses on simulating lake water temperature, which is critical for understanding the impact of changing climate on aquatic ecosystems and assisting in aquatic resource management decisions. General Lake Model (GLM) is a state-of-the-art physics-based model used for addressing such problems. However, like other physics-based models used for studying scientific and engineering systems, it has several well-known limitations due to simplified representations of the physical processes being modeled or challenges in selecting appropriate parameters. While state-of-the-art machine learning models can sometimes outperform physics-based models given ample amount of training data, they can produce results that are physically inconsistent. This article proposes a physics-guided recurrent neural network model (PGRNN) that combines RNNs and physics-based models to leverage their complementary strengths and improves the modeling of physical processes. Specifically, we show that a PGRNN can improve prediction accuracy over that of physics-based models (by over 20% even with very little training data), while generating outputs consistent with physical laws. An important aspect of our PGRNN approach lies in its ability to incorporate the knowledge encoded in physics-based models. This allows training the PGRNN model using very few true observed data while also ensuring high prediction accuracy. Although we present and evaluate this methodology in the context of modeling the dynamics of temperature in lakes, it is applicable more widely to a range of scientific and engineering disciplines where physics-based (also known as mechanistic) models are used.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3447814

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 2 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Jia, X., Willard, J., Karpatne, A., Read, J. S., Zwart, J. A., Steinbach, M., & Kumar, V.
Venue
ACM/IMS Transactions on Data Science
Published
2021-05-18
Volume
2
Issue
3
Pages
1-26
ISSN
  • 2577-3224 (ISSN-L)
  • 2691-1922
OpenAlex
W3160258528
Cited by
299
References
2
FWCI
19.49
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

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.