No abstract

Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs), introduced in [1], are effective in solving integerorder partial differential equations (PDEs) based on scattered and noisy data. PINNs employ standard feedforward neural networks (NNs) with the PDEs explicitly encoded into the NN using automatic differentiation, while the sum of the mean-squared PDE-residuals and the mean-squared error in initial/boundary conditions is minimized with respect to the NN parameters. Here we extend PINNs to fractional PINNs (fPINNs) to solve space-time fractional advection-diffusion equations (fractional ADEs), and we study systematically their convergence, hence explaining both of fPINNs and PINNs for first time. Specifically, we demonstrate their accuracy and effectiveness in solving multi-dimensional forward and inverse problems with forcing terms whose values are only known at randomly scattered spatio-temporal coordinates (black-box forcing terms). A novel element of the fPINNs is the hybrid approach that we introduce for constructing the residual in the loss function using both automatic differentiation for the integer-order operators and numerical discretization for the fractional operators. This approach bypasses the difficulties stemming from the fact that automatic differentiation is not applicable to fractional operators because the standard chain rule in integer calculus is not valid in fractional calculus. To discretize the fractional operators, we employ the Grünwald-Letnikov (GL) formula in one-dimensional fractional ADEs and the vector GL formula in conjunction with the directional fractional Laplacian in two-and three-dimensional fractional ADEs. We first consider the one-dimensional fractional Poisson equation and compare the convergence of the fPINNs against the finite difference method (FDM). We present the solution convergence using both the mean L 2 error as well as the standard deviation due to sensitivity to NN parameter initializations. Using different GL formulas we observe first-, second-, and third-order convergence rates for small size of training sets but the error saturates for larger training sets. We explain these results by analyzing the four sources of numerical errors due to discretization, sampling, NN approximation, and optimization. The total error decays monotonically (below 10 −5 for third order GL formula) but it saturates beyond that point due to the optimization error. We also analyze the relative balance between discretization and sampling errors and observe that the sampling size and the number of discretization points (auxiliary points) should be comparable to achieve the highest accuracy. As we increase the depth of the NN up to certain value, the mean error decreases and the standard deviation increases whereas the width has essentially no effect unless its value is either too small or too large. We next consider time-dependent fractional ADEs and compare white-box (WB) and black-box (BB) forcing. We observe that for the WB forcing, our results are similar to the aforementioned cases, however,...

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Neural-net-induced Gaussian process (NNGP) regression inherits both the high expressivity of deep neural networks (deep NNs) as well as the uncertainty quantification property of Gaussian processes (GPs). We generalize the current NNGP to first include a larger number of hyperparameters and subsequently train the model by maximum likelihood estimation. Unlike previous works on NNGP that targeted classification, here we apply the generalized NNGP to function approximation and to solving partial differential equations (PDEs). Specifically, we develop an analytical iteration formula to compute the covariance function of GP induced by deep NN with an error-function nonlinearity. We compare the performance of the generalized NNGP for function approximations and PDE solutions with those of GPs and fully-connected NNs. We observe that for smooth functions the generalized NNGP can yield the same order of accuracy with GP, while both NNGP and GP outperform deep NN. For non-smooth functions, the generalized NNGP is superior to GP and comparable or superior to deep NN.

No abstract

No abstract