Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

When Do Extended Physics-Informed Neural Networks (XPINNs) Improve Generalization?

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2109.09444 v7 pith:CV57W7OJ submitted 2021-09-20 cs.LG cs.NAmath.DSmath.NAstat.ML

classification cs.LGcs.NAmath.DSmath.NAstat.ML
keywords generalizationxpinnspinnsdecompositionnetworkswhenbecomebound
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) have become a popular choice for solving high-dimensional partial differential equations (PDEs) due to their excellent approximation power and generalization ability. Recently, Extended PINNs (XPINNs) based on domain decomposition methods have attracted considerable attention due to their effectiveness in modeling multiscale and multiphysics problems and their parallelization. However, theoretical understanding on their convergence and generalization properties remains unexplored. In this study, we take an initial step towards understanding how and when XPINNs outperform PINNs. Specifically, for general multi-layer PINNs and XPINNs, we first provide a prior generalization bound via the complexity of the target functions in the PDE problem, and a posterior generalization bound via the posterior matrix norms of the networks after optimization. Moreover, based on our bounds, we analyze the conditions under which XPINNs improve generalization. Concretely, our theory shows that the key building block of XPINN, namely the domain decomposition, introduces a tradeoff for generalization. On the one hand, XPINNs decompose the complex PDE solution into several simple parts, which decreases the complexity needed to learn each part and boosts generalization. On the other hand, decomposition leads to less training data being available in each subdomain, and hence such model is typically prone to overfitting and may become less generalizable. Empirically, we choose five PDEs to show when XPINNs perform better than, similar to, or worse than PINNs, hence demonstrating and justifying our new theory.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. ViscoReg: Neural Signed Distance Functions via Viscosity Solutions

    cs.GR 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A viscosity-regularized Eikonal loss with annealed epsilon improves Neural SDF reconstruction and yields the first generalization bound for SDF learning.

  2. BridgeNet: A Hybrid, Physics-Informed Machine Learning Framework for Solving High-Dimensional Fokker-Planck Equations

    physics.comp-ph 2025-06 reject novelty 3.0 of 10

    A hybrid CNN-PINN framework for Fokker-Planck equations is proposed, but the reported accuracy rests on incorrect exact solutions and test-set-tuned hyperparameters.

Pith tools