Can physics-informed neural networks beat the finite element method?

IMA J Appl Math

Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, University of Cambridge, Wilberforce Road, Cambridge CB3 0WA, UK.

Published: January 2024

AI Article Synopsis

  • - Partial differential equations (PDEs) are crucial for modeling various scientific processes, and numerical methods like the finite element method are commonly used to approximate their solutions
  • - Recent advancements in deep neural networks have led to the development of physics-informed neural networks, which are designed to solve PDEs more effectively, although they have mostly been studied separately from traditional methods
  • - In a comparative study of both approaches, it was found that while physics-informed neural networks may evaluate PDEs faster in some cases, they did not surpass the finite element method in overall solution time and accuracy for a variety of linear and nonlinear PDEs.

Article Abstract

Partial differential equations (PDEs) play a fundamental role in the mathematical modelling of many processes and systems in physical, biological and other sciences. To simulate such processes and systems, the solutions of PDEs often need to be approximated numerically. The finite element method, for instance, is a usual standard methodology to do so. The recent success of deep neural networks at various approximation tasks has motivated their use in the numerical solution of PDEs. These so-called physics-informed neural networks and their variants have shown to be able to successfully approximate a large range of PDEs. So far, physics-informed neural networks and the finite element method have mainly been studied in isolation of each other. In this work, we compare the methodologies in a systematic computational study. Indeed, we employ both methods to numerically solve various linear and nonlinear PDEs: Poisson in 1D, 2D and 3D, Allen-Cahn in 1D, semilinear Schrödinger in 1D and 2D. We then compare computational costs and approximation accuracies. In terms of solution time and accuracy, physics-informed neural networks have not been able to outperform the finite element method in our study. In some experiments, they were faster at evaluating the solved PDE.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11197852PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/imamat/hxae011DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

neural networks
20
physics-informed neural
16
finite element
16
element method
12
processes systems
8
networks
5
pdes
5
physics-informed
4
networks beat
4
finite
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!