Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 109 references

A Memory Efficient Adjoint Method to Enable Billion Parameter Optimization on a Single GPU in Dynamic Problems

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that a superposition identity lets an adjoint sensitivity be approximated from two self-terms of a combined forward-plus-adjoint field, so dynamic wave optimization no longer needs to store the forward time history.

desk verdict A genuinely new superposition trick for adjoint gradients with real GPU scalability, but the O(dofs) memory claim misses the adjoint-source history for volume-supported sources. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.15744 v1 pith:266OYJT5 submitted 2025-09-19 cs.CE

Leon Herrmann , Tim Bürchner , László Kudela , Stefan Kollmannsberger This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CE
keywords adjointoptimizationGPUaccelerationfinitedifferencemethoddynamicfullwaveforminversiontopologyacousticsmemory-efficientsensitivity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper claims that the gradient of a dynamic optimization objective in wave problems can be computed without ever storing the forward wavefield, by running one forward solve and one backward solve of a superposed wavefield and combining their kernel values. The memory needed drops from the number of grid points times the number of time steps to a few grids of size equal to the number of degrees of freedom, which is what makes billion-parameter problems fit on a single GPU. The price is that the gradient is approximate: the argument relies on the quadratic term in the adjoint field being negligible after choosing a scale factor $k$, and it only works for self-adjoint, damping-free problems with time-reversible integrators. The authors demonstrate the method on full waveform inversion and transient acoustic topology optimization, computing sensitivities for problems up to about $10^9$ unknowns. If the approximation holds, dynamic adjoint optimization on GPUs stops being memory-bound for a large class of wave problems.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the bilinear Fr\'echet kernel $K_\gamma(u,u^\dagger)$ — the time-integrated product of forward and adjoint wave fields (velocity and gradient terms) that gives the sensitivity of the cost function to material perturbations. The paper's mechanism is the superposition identity (Equation 39): because the kernel is bilinear, the mixed term $K_\gamma(u,u^\dagger)$ is recovered as $\frac{1}{2k}(K_\gamma(u_s,u_s)-K_\gamma(u,u))$ where $u_s = u + k u^\dagger$, with the $k^2 K_\gamma(u^\dagger,u^\dagger)$ term neglected. This converts the standard adjoint computation, which needs both fields at the same physical time and therefore a stored forward history, into two sequential simulation sweeps — a forward sweep accumulating $K_\gamma(u,u)$ and an adjoint-source term, followed by a backward sweep of the superposed problem accumulating $K_\gamma(u_s,u_s)$ — with only a small constant number of solution grids alive at any moment.

What would settle it

Run Algorithm 1 with a volume-supported adjoint source that depends on the forward field over the whole domain (a TATO problem with $\Omega_s = \Omega$). If the method's peak memory stays at a few solution grids regardless of the number of time steps $N$, the O(dofs) claim holds; if the implementation must store or regenerate the forward field over $\Omega_s$ for every time step and peak memory grows with $N$, the claim is falsified for that class.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that for a bilinear sensitivity kernel $K_\gamma$, the mixed term needed for the gradient can be extracted from two self-terms by superposition: with $u_s = u + k u^\dagger$, bilinearity gives $K_\gamma(u_s,u_s) = K_\gamma(u,u) + 2k K_\gamma(u,u^\dagger) + k^2 K_\gamma(u^\dagger,u^\dagger)$, and when the adjoint field is much smaller than the forward field the last term is negligible. Hence $K_\gamma(u,u^\dagger) \approx \frac{1}{2k}\big(K_\gamma(u_s,u_s)-K_\gamma(u,u)\big)$. The term $K_\gamma(u,u)$ can be accumulated during the forward solve, and $K_\gamma(u_s,u_s)$ during a backwards solve of the superposed problem, so the full forward history never has to be stored; only a constant number of solution grids is kept. The cost is an approximate sensitivity with a hyperparameter $k$ whose admissible range spans many orders of magnitude, and the applicability is restricted to self-adjoint problems with time-reversible time integration. The authors demonstrate sensitivity computation up to roughly $10^9$ degrees of freedom on a single 40 GB GPU, and run full waveform inversion and transient acoustic topology optimization at problem sizes that standard adjoint methods cannot reach.

Load-bearing premise

The backward pass must be able to obtain the adjoint source at every time step, and the paper does not state where that time history lives when the source depends on the forward wave over a large region; if it has to be stored, the memory claim fails.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Memory per sensitivity computation drops from $O(\text{dofs} \times \text{time steps})$ to $O(\text{dofs})$, so the practical limit for dynamic adjoint optimization shifts from memory capacity to wall-clock time.
  • On a 40 GB GPU the theoretical single-precision limit is about $2.5 \times 10^9$ parameters, roughly three orders of magnitude beyond what the standard adjoint method reaches with thousands of time steps.
  • The approximation adds no extra computational work beyond one forward and one backward solve, unlike checkpointing or compression schemes that trade extra compute or accuracy for memory.
  • A usable $k$ can be calibrated during the first gradient computation by decreasing $k$ until single- and double-precision results diverge, without needing a reference gradient.
  • The method is limited to self-adjoint, damping-free dynamics and time-reversible time integrators, so dissipative wave problems are outside its scope.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • For point-sensor adjoint sources, as in the full waveform inversion examples, the required time history of the adjoint source is only the sensor traces, which is cheap to store; the O(dofs) memory claim is therefore solid there. For volume-supported adjoint sources that depend on the forward field over a large region, the time history of that source may reintroduce a memory term proportional to su
  • The same superposition identity should extend to other bilinear kernels over reversible dynamics, such as elastic wave equations without attenuation or Schr\"odinger-type equations, since the argument only requires self-adjointness and time reversibility.
  • Because the optimizer used in the paper is Adam, which tolerates gradient noise, the approximation's dependence on $k$ may be even less consequential in practice than the error curves suggest; a direct test would be to compare optimization trajectories with the exact adjoint gradient on a moderately sized problem.
  • The paper's full-structure FWI result failed to converge in ten iterations, attributed to ill-posedness rather than the approximation; a testable extension would be to run the same large problem with the exact adjoint method on a machine with enough memory to isolate the approximation's contribution to the failure.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes an approximate adjoint sensitivity computation for transient, self-adjoint, undamped wave problems. The central idea is a linear superposition u_s = u + k u_dagger; because the Frechet kernel is bilinear, the identity K(u_s,u_s) = K(u,u) + 2k K(u,u_dagger) + k^2 K(u_dagger,u_dagger) yields the approximation K(u,u_dagger) roughly equal to (K(u_s,u_s) - K(u,u))/(2k), provided the k^2 term is negligible (Eqs. (38)-(39)). Since K(u,u) can be accumulated during the forward simulation and K(u_s,u_s) during a backward simulation of the superposed problem, the forward wavefield need not be stored. The paper presents this as Algorithm 1, studies the sensitivity error as a function of the hyperparameter k, and demonstrates the method on three-dimensional full waveform inversion (up to about 1.2e8 degrees of freedom) and two-dimensional transient acoustic topology optimization (up to about 1.5e7 degrees of freedom), with sensitivity computations reported up to about 1e9 degrees of freedom. The authors also provide a CUDA finite-difference solver and state that the implementation is available online.

Significance. If the central memory claim holds, the method would remove the dominant memory bottleneck in adjoint-based transient optimization on GPUs and would be of practical value in full waveform inversion and topology optimization. The bilinear expansion is exact and the approximation error is characterized honestly through the hockey-stick plots in Fig. 5, including a comparison against standard adjoint gradients over a wide range of k. The released code and the documented solver timings are strengths. However, the claimed asymptotic O(dofs) memory is not established for volume-supported adjoint sources, and the printed Algorithm 1 appears to omit the 1/(2k) normalization required by Eq. (39). These issues are central to the paper's contribution and must be resolved before the memory and scalability claims can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 4, Algorithm 1 (lines 5-16), Eq. (22)] Algorithm 1's backward loop (lines 12-16) requires the adjoint source f_dagger at every time step, but f_dagger is computed in the forward loop (line 5) and no storage or regeneration of its time history is specified. The memory discussion in Section 4 counts only 'at most four solution vectors' (u^{n-1}/u_s^{n+1}, u^n/u_s^n, u^{n+1}/u_s^{n+1}, K~gamma), which omits this history. For FWI the adjoint source (Eq. (12)) is supported on receiver points, so storing the residual traces adds only N_r times N floats and the O(dofs) claim can stand if this is stated explicitly. For TATO the adjoint source (Eq. (22)) is supported on the volume Omega_s and depends on the forward solution: implementing line 13 requires either storing u (or f_dagger) on Omega_s for all N time steps, i.e., memory of size |Omega_s| times N, which scales as O(dofs times N) when Omega_s is a fixed fraction of the domain. No such storage is described, and recomputing u would reintroduce the checkpointing cost the method claims to avoid. The paper therefore does not support the 'memory usage is independent of the number of time steps' claim (Section 4.1) or the 2.5e9-parameter limit (Section 4.2) for TATO; the claims must be qualified or a valid O(dofs) strategy for volume-supported adjoint sources must be supplied.
  2. [Section 4, Algorithm 1 vs. Eq. (39)] Algorithm 1 accumulates K~gamma as -sum incrementKernel(u) + sum incrementKernel(u_s) (lines 7 and 14) and returns this sum directly. However, Eq. (39) defines K~gamma = (1/(2k))(K(u_s,u_s) - K(u,u)). Because line 10 scales f_dagger by k, u_s = u + k u_dagger and K(u_s,u_s) - K(u,u) equals 2k K(u,u_dagger) + k^2 K(u_dagger,u_dagger); without the factor 1/(2k) the returned quantity is not the stated gradient approximation. Unless the implementation applies an unstated normalization, the error curves in Fig. 5 could not match the reference gradients. Please correct Algorithm 1 (for example, multiply K~gamma by 1/(2k) before the return) or revise Eq. (39) to match the implementation.
  3. [Section 4, Algorithm 1 (lines 5, 10, 13)] The pseudocode has an inconsistent time index and scaling for the adjoint force: line 5 computes f_dagger^{n+1}, line 13 uses f_dagger^n + f^n, and line 10 multiplies only the final f_dagger^{n+1} by k after the forward loop has ended. If the f_dagger history is kept, the scaling has to be applied to every time level (or inside the backward loop); if it is not kept, line 13 cannot be evaluated. Please specify the intended indexing and move the scaling to a well-defined location.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 4, paragraph after Algorithm 1] The list 'at most four solution vectors are needed (u^{n-1}/u_s^{n+1}, u^n/u_s^n, u^{n+1}/u_s^{n+1}, K~gamma)' is garbled: it appears to list the forward and superposed grids at two different times in the same slots; please clarify which three solution grids are reused.
  2. [Section 3.1, before Eqs. (30)-(31)] In the sentence preceding Eqs. (30) and (31), 'The are straightforward' should read 'They are straightforward'.
  3. [Appendix B, Figure 18 caption] The phrase 'In contrast to Figure 18' appears to be a self-reference; it should likely refer to Figure 16.
  4. [Section 4, near Eq. (39)] The statement that K(u_s,u_s) is 'independent of u' is too strong; u_s is driven by a source that depends on u through f_dagger, so the intended meaning is that K(u_s,u_s) can be accumulated without storing the forward history of u.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the kernel approximation is an algebraic identity plus an explicitly acknowledged neglected term, and the approximation is validated against an independent standard adjoint gradient.

full rationale

The paper's central claim (Equation 39) follows from the bilinearity of the Fréchet kernel: substituting u_s = u + k u† into K(u_s,u_s) gives K(u,u) + 2kK(u,u†) + k^2K(u†,u†) (Equation 38), and the paper explicitly identifies the subtracted and neglected terms. No fitted quantity is used to define the claimed result; k is a user-selected hyperparameter whose admissible range (spanning several orders of magnitude) is established in Section 4.1 by comparing single- and double-precision runs and by quantitative comparison to a reference gradient computed by the standard adjoint method, which is an external check rather than an input. There is no self-citation chain carrying the derivation: references to the authors' prior work (e.g., [23], [56]) supply forward-solver baselines, the FWI parametrization, and comparison timings, but they are not invoked to justify Equation 39 or to forbid alternative derivations. The Algorithm 1 memory ledger and the O(dofs) claim are a potential correctness limitation for volume-supported adjoint sources (the backward loop needs f† history), but that is a missing-support/implementation issue, not a circular reduction: the sensitivity formula does not assume the memory claim. Therefore no circular step was identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The method introduces one numerical hyperparameter, k, and relies on four assumptions: self-adjointness, bilinearity of the kernel, smallness of the dropped quadratic term, and availability of the adjoint-source history. The last assumption is the least justified because the paper does not quantify its memory footprint.

free parameters (1)
  • k (superposition scaling factor) = Calibrated per problem; roughly 1e13 to 1e16 for FWI and 1e-2 to 1e2 for TATO
    Controls the trade-off between dropping the k^2 K(u_dagger,u_dagger) term and roundoff/overflow. Calibrated in the first optimization step by comparing single and double precision, not derived from theory.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The wave equation is self-adjoint with no damping, and the time integrator is time-reversible.
    Required for the adjoint field to obey the same equation and for backward reconstruction of the superposed field. Acknowledged in the abstract and Section 4.
  • standard math The Frechet kernel K is a symmetric bilinear form, so K(u_s,u_s) expands as stated in Equation (38).
    Bilinearity of the kernel and the standard adjoint sensitivity derivation from reference [56].
  • ad hoc to paper The neglected term (k/2) K(u_dagger,u_dagger) is small for the chosen k throughout optimization.
    No rigorous bound is proven; the authors demonstrate a wide empirical range of k using hockey-stick error curves in Figure 5.
  • ad hoc to paper The adjoint source time history f_dagger is available in the backward pass without storing the full forward field, or its storage cost is negligible.
    Algorithm 1 lines 5 and 13 require f_dagger at every time step, but the memory accounting in Section 4 counts only three solution grids plus the kernel and does not mention f_dagger storage.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Memory Efficient Adjoint Method to Enable Billion Parameter Optimization on a Single GPU in Dynamic Problems." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/266OYJT5

@misc{pith2026250915744,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Memory Efficient Adjoint Method to Enable Billion Parameter Optimization on a Single GPU in Dynamic Problems},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/266OYJT5}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.15744}
}
read the original abstract

Dynamic optimization is currently limited by sensitivity computations that require information from full forward and adjoint wave fields. Since the forward and adjoint solutions are computed in opposing time directions, the forward solution must be stored. This requires a substantial amount of memory for large-scale problems even when using check pointing or data compression techniques. As a result, the problem size is memory bound rather than bound by wall clock time, when working with modern GPU-based implementations that have limited memory capacity. To overcome this limitation, we introduce a new approach for approximate sensitivity computation based on the adjoint method (for self-adjoint problems) that relies on the principle of superposition. The approximation allows an iterative computation of the sensitivity, reducing the memory burden to that of the solution at a small number of time steps, i.e., to the number of degrees of freedom. This enables sensitivity computations for problems with billions of degrees of freedom on current GPUs, such as the A100 from NVIDIA (from 2020). We demonstrate the approach on full waveform inversion and transient acoustic topology optimization problems, relying on a highly efficient finite difference forward solver implemented in CUDA. Phenomena such as damping cannot be considered, as the approximation technique is limited to self-adjoint problems.

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

109 extracted references · 31 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    David Mich´ ea and Dimitri Komatitsch. Accelerating a three-dimensional finite-difference wave propagation code using GPU graphics cards: Accelerating a wave propagation code using GPUs.Geophysical Journal International, pages no–no, May 2010. ISSN 0956540X, 1365246X. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-246X.2010.04616.x. URLhttps://academic.oup.com/gji/article-lookup/do...

    arXiv 2010

  2. [2]

    Brian Hamilton and Craig J. Webb. Room acoustics modelling using GPU-accelerated finite difference and finite volume methods on a face-centered cubic grid. June 2013. URLhttps://hgpu.org/?p=9655

    2013

  3. [3]

    Accelerating CFD simulation with high order finite difference method on curvilinear coordinates for modern GPU clusters.Advances in Aerodynamics, 4(1):7, February 2022

    Chuang-Chao Ye, Peng-Jun-Yi Zhang, Zhen-Hua Wan, Rui Yan, and De-Jun Sun. Accelerating CFD simulation with high order finite difference method on curvilinear coordinates for modern GPU clusters.Advances in Aerodynamics, 4(1):7, February 2022. ISSN 2524-6992. doi: 10.1186/s42774-021-00098-3. URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1186/s42774-021-00098-3

    doi:10.1186/s42774-021-00098-3 2022

  4. [4]

    GPU-Accelerated Finite Element Method for Modelling Light Transport in Diffuse Optical Tomography.International Journal of Biomedical Imaging, 2011:403892, 2011

    Martin Schweiger. GPU-Accelerated Finite Element Method for Modelling Light Transport in Diffuse Optical Tomography.International Journal of Biomedical Imaging, 2011:403892, 2011. ISSN 1687-4196. doi: 10.1155/ 2011/403892

    2011

  5. [5]

    Tr¨ aff, Anton Rydahl, Sven Karlsson, Ole Sigmund, and Niels Aage

    Erik A. Tr¨ aff, Anton Rydahl, Sven Karlsson, Ole Sigmund, and Niels Aage. Simple and efficient GPU accelerated topology optimisation: Codes and applications.Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 410: 116043, May 2023. ISSN 0045-7825. doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2023.116043. URLhttps://www.sciencedirect.co m/science/article/pii/S0045782523001676

    arXiv 2023

  6. [6]

    Modular and flexible spectral-element waveform modelling in two and three dimensions.Geophysical Journal International, 216(3):1675–1692, March 2019

    Michael Afanasiev, Christian Boehm, Martin van Driel, Lion Krischer, Max Rietmann, Dave A May, Matthew G Knepley, and Andreas Fichtner. Modular and flexible spectral-element waveform modelling in two and three dimensions.Geophysical Journal International, 216(3):1675–1692, March 2019. ISSN 0956-540X, 1365-246X. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggy469. URLhttps://academic...

    doi:10.1093/gji/ggy469 2019

  7. [7]

    Generalized GPU Acceleration for Applications Employing Finite-Volume Meth- ods

    Jingheng Xu, Haohuan Fu, Lin Gan, Chao Yang, Wei Xue, Shizhen Xu, Wenlai Zhao, Xinliang Wang, Bingwei Chen, and Guangwen Yang. Generalized GPU Acceleration for Applications Employing Finite-Volume Meth- ods. In2016 16th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Cluster, Cloud and Grid Computing (CCGrid), pages 126–135, May 2016. doi: 10.1109/CCGrid.2016.30. URL...

    work page doi:10.1109/ccgrid.2016.30 2016

  8. [8]

    MIT Press, 2016

    Ian Goodfellow, Yoshua Bengio, and Aaron Courville.Deep Learning. MIT Press, 2016. ISBN 0-262-03561-8. URLhttp://www.deeplearningbook.org

    2016

Show all 109 references
  1. [9]

    Bishop and Hugh Bishop.Deep Learning: Foundations and Concepts

    Christopher M. Bishop and Hugh Bishop.Deep Learning: Foundations and Concepts. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2024. ISBN 978-3-031-45467-7 978-3-031-45468-4. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-45468-4. URL https://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-031-45468-4

    2024 doi

  2. [10]

    Mart´ ın Abadi, Ashish Agarwal, Paul Barham, Eugene Brevdo, Zhifeng Chen, Craig Citro, Greg S. Corrado, Andy Davis, Jeffrey Dean, Matthieu Devin, Sanjay Ghemawat, Ian Goodfellow, Andrew Harp, Geoffrey Irving, Michael Isard, Yangqing Jia, Rafal Jozefowicz, Lukasz Kaiser, Manjun...

    2016 arXiv

  3. [11]

    JAX: composable trans- formations of Python+NumPy programs, 2018

    James Bradbury, Roy Frostig, Peter Hawkins, Matthew James Johnson, Chris Leary, Dougal Maclaurin, George Necula, Adam Paszke, Jake VanderPlas, Skye Wanderman-Milne, and Qiao Zhang. JAX: composable trans- formations of Python+NumPy programs, 2018. URLhttp://github.com/google/jax. 25

    2018

  4. [12]

    PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Library, December 2019

    Adam Paszke, Sam Gross, Francisco Massa, Adam Lerer, James Bradbury, Gregory Chanan, Trevor Killeen, Zeming Lin, Natalia Gimelshein, Luca Antiga, Alban Desmaison, Andreas K¨ opf, Edward Yang, Zach DeVito, Martin Raison, Alykhan Tejani, Sasank Chilamkurthy, Benoit Steiner, Lu F...

    2019 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Springer Inter- national Publishing, Cham, 2021

    Stefan Kollmannsberger, Davide D’Angella, Moritz Jokeit, and Leon Herrmann.Deep Learning in Computa- tional Mechanics: An Introductory Course, volume 977 ofStudies in Computational Intelligence. Springer Inter- national Publishing, Cham, 2021. ISBN 978-3-030-76586-6 978-3-030-...

    2021 doi

  6. [14]

    Deep learning in computational mechanics: a review.Com- putational Mechanics, January 2024

    Leon Herrmann and Stefan Kollmannsberger. Deep learning in computational mechanics: a review.Com- putational Mechanics, January 2024. ISSN 0178-7675, 1432-0924. doi: 10.1007/s00466-023-02434-4. URL https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00466-023-02434-4

    2024 doi

  7. [15]

    Neural network representation of finite element method.Neural Networks, 7 (2):389–395, January 1994

    Jun Takeuchi and Yukio Kosugi. Neural network representation of finite element method.Neural Networks, 7 (2):389–395, January 1994. ISSN 0893-6080. doi: 10.1016/0893-6080(94)90031-0. URLhttps://www.scienc edirect.com/science/article/pii/0893608094900310

    1994

  8. [16]

    Ramuhalli, L

    P. Ramuhalli, L. Udpa, and S.S. Udpa. Finite-element neural networks for solving differential equations.IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, 16(6):1381–1392, November 2005. ISSN 1941-0093. doi: 10.1109/TNN.2005 .857945. URLhttps://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1528518

    2005

  9. [17]

    FEA-Net: A Deep Convolutional Neural Network With PhysicsPrior For Efficient Data Driven PDE Learning

    Houpu Yao, Yi Ren, and Yongming Liu. FEA-Net: A Deep Convolutional Neural Network With PhysicsPrior For Efficient Data Driven PDE Learning. InAIAA Scitech 2019 Forum, San Diego, California, January 2019. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. ISBN 978-1-62410-578-...

    2019 doi

  10. [18]

    FEA-Net: A physics-guided data-driven model for efficient mechanical response prediction.Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 363:112892, May 2020

    Houpu Yao, Yi Gao, and Yongming Liu. FEA-Net: A physics-guided data-driven model for efficient mechanical response prediction.Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 363:112892, May 2020. ISSN 0045-7825. doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2020.112892. URLhttps://www.sciencedire...

    2020

  11. [19]

    Apley, Gre- gory J

    Chanwook Park, Ye Lu, Sourav Saha, Tianju Xue, Jiachen Guo, Satyajit Mojumder, Daniel W. Apley, Gre- gory J. Wagner, and Wing Kam Liu. Convolution hierarchical deep-learning neural network (C-HiDeNN) with graphics processing unit (GPU) acceleration.Computational Mechanics, 72(...

    2023 doi

  12. [20]

    Mishra and P.S

    R.K. Mishra and P.S. Hall. NFDTD concept.IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, 16(2):484–490, March

  13. [21]

    Seismic Full-Waveform Inversion Using Deep Learning Tools and Techniques, January 2018

    Alan Richardson. Seismic Full-Waveform Inversion Using Deep Learning Tools and Techniques, January 2018. URLhttp://arxiv.org/abs/1801.07232. arXiv:1801.07232

    2018 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Innanen, Junxiao Li, and Daniel O

    Jian Sun, Zhan Niu, Kristopher A. Innanen, Junxiao Li, and Daniel O. Trad. A theory-guided deep-learning formulation and optimization of seismic waveform inversion.GEOPHYSICS, 85(2):R87–R99, March 2020. ISSN 0016-8033, 1942-2156. doi: 10.1190/geo2019-0138.1. URLhttps://library...

    2020 doi

  15. [23]

    On the use of neural networks for full waveform inversion.Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 415:116278, October 2023

    Leon Herrmann, Tim B¨ urchner, Felix Dietrich, and Stefan Kollmannsberger. On the use of neural networks for full waveform inversion.Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 415:116278, October 2023. ISSN 00457825. doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2023.116278. URLhttps://linki...

    2023

  16. [24]

    R.-E. Plessix. A review of the adjoint-state method for computing the gradient of a functional with geophysical applications.Geophysical Journal International, 167(2):495–503, November 2006. ISSN 0956540X, 1365246X. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-246X.2006.02978.x. URLhttps://academic.ou...

    2006 arXiv

  17. [27]

    A tutorial on the adjoint method for inverse problems.Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 380:113810, July 2021

    Dan Givoli. A tutorial on the adjoint method for inverse problems.Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 380:113810, July 2021. ISSN 0045-7825. doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2021.113810. URLhttps: //www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0045782521001468

    2021

  18. [28]

    Achieving logarithmic growth of temporal and spatial complexity in reverse automatic differentiation.Optimization Methods and Software, 1(1):35–54, January 1992

    Andreas Griewank. Achieving logarithmic growth of temporal and spatial complexity in reverse automatic differentiation.Optimization Methods and Software, 1(1):35–54, January 1992. ISSN 1055-6788, 1029-4937. doi: 10.1080/10556789208805505. URLhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/ful...

    1992 doi

  19. [29]

    Andreas Griewank and Andrea Walther. Algorithm 799: revolve: an implementation of checkpointing for the reverse or adjoint mode of computational differentiation.ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software, 26(1): 19–45, March 2000. ISSN 0098-3500, 1557-7295. doi: 10.1145/347837....

  20. [30]

    William W. Symes. Reverse time migration with optimal checkpointing.GEOPHYSICS, 72(5):SM213–SM221, September 2007. ISSN 0016-8033, 1942-2156. doi: 10.1190/1.2742686. URLhttps://library.seg.org/doi/ 10.1190/1.2742686

    2007 doi

  21. [31]

    Anderson, Lijian Tan, and Don Wang

    John E. Anderson, Lijian Tan, and Don Wang. Time-reversal checkpointing methods for RTM and FWI. GEOPHYSICS, 77(4):S93–S103, July 2012. ISSN 0016-8033, 1942-2156. doi: 10.1190/geo2011-0114.1. URL https://library.seg.org/doi/10.1190/geo2011-0114.1

    2012 doi

  22. [32]

    Wavefield compression for 26 adjoint methods in full-waveform inversion.GEOPHYSICS, 81(6):R385–R397, 2016

    Christian Boehm, Mauricio Hanzich, Josep de la Puente, and Andreas Fichtner. Wavefield compression for 26 adjoint methods in full-waveform inversion.GEOPHYSICS, 81(6):R385–R397, 2016. doi: 10.1190/geo2015-0 653.1. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1190/geo2015-0653.1

    2016 doi

  23. [33]

    Herrmann

    Curt Da Silva, Yiming Zhang, Rajiv Kumar, and Felix J. Herrmann. Applications of low-rank compressed seismic data to full-waveform inversion and extended image volumes.GEOPHYSICS, 84(3):R371–R383, 2019. doi: 10.1190/geo2018-0116.1. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1190/geo2018-0116.1

    2019 doi

  24. [34]

    High-performance xPU Stencil Computations in Julia.JuliaCon Proceedings, 6(64):138, October 2024

    Samuel Omlin and Ludovic R¨ ass. High-performance xPU Stencil Computations in Julia.JuliaCon Proceedings, 6(64):138, October 2024. ISSN 2642-4029. doi: 10.21105/jcon.00138. URLhttps://proceedings.juliacon.o rg/papers/10.21105/jcon.00138

    2024 doi

  25. [35]

    Distributed Parallelization of xPU Stencil Computations in Julia.JuliaCon Proceedings, 6(65):137, November 2024

    Samuel Omlin, Ludovic R¨ ass, and Ivan Utkin. Distributed Parallelization of xPU Stencil Computations in Julia.JuliaCon Proceedings, 6(65):137, November 2024. ISSN 2642-4029. doi: 10.21105/jcon.00137. URL https://proceedings.juliacon.org/papers/10.21105/jcon.00137

    2024 doi

  26. [36]

    SeimicWaves.jl: an efficient yet user-friendly Julia package for Full-Waveform Inversion on multi-xPUs

    Giacomo Aloisi, Andrea Zunino, and Andreas Fichtner. SeimicWaves.jl: an efficient yet user-friendly Julia package for Full-Waveform Inversion on multi-xPUs. Technical Report EGU24-10916, Copernicus Meetings, March 2024. URLhttps://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU24/EGU24-10916.html

    2024

  27. [37]

    Clapp.Reverse time migration with random boundaries, pages 2809–2813

    Robert G. Clapp.Reverse time migration with random boundaries, pages 2809–2813. 2009. doi: 10.1190/1.32 55432. URLhttps://library.seg.org/doi/abs/10.1190/1.3255432

    2009 doi

  28. [38]

    Random boundary condition for memory-efficient waveform inversion gradient computation.GEOPHYSICS, 80:R351–R359, 11 2015

    Xukai Shen and Robert Clapp. Random boundary condition for memory-efficient waveform inversion gradient computation.GEOPHYSICS, 80:R351–R359, 11 2015. doi: 10.1190/geo2014-0542.1

    2015 doi

  29. [39]

    Inversion of seismic reflection data in the acoustic approximation.GEOPHYSICS, 49(8): 1259–1266, August 1984

    Albert Tarantola. Inversion of seismic reflection data in the acoustic approximation.GEOPHYSICS, 49(8): 1259–1266, August 1984. ISSN 0016-8033, 1942-2156. doi: 10.1190/1.1441754. URLhttps://library.seg. org/doi/10.1190/1.1441754

    1984 doi

  30. [40]

    Advances in Geophysical and Envi- ronmental Mechanics and Mathematics

    Andreas Fichtner.Full Seismic Waveform Modelling and Inversion. Advances in Geophysical and Envi- ronmental Mechanics and Mathematics. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011. ISBN 978-3-642-15806-3. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-15807-0

    2011 doi

  31. [41]

    Topology optimization of an acoustic horn.Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 196(1-3):420–436, December 2006

    Eddie Wadbro and Martin Berggren. Topology optimization of an acoustic horn.Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 196(1-3):420–436, December 2006. ISSN 00457825. doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2006.05.005. URLhttps://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0045782506001745

    2006 doi

  32. [42]

    Rigid body modeling issue in acoustical topology optimization.Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 198(9-12):1017–1030, February 2009

    Jin Woo Lee and Yoon Young Kim. Rigid body modeling issue in acoustical topology optimization.Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 198(9-12):1017–1030, February 2009. ISSN 00457825. doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2008.11.008. URLhttps://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/p...

    2009 doi

  33. [43]

    Minimization of sound radiation from vibrating bi-material structures using topology optimization.Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 33(4-5):305–321, February 2007

    Jianbin Du and Niels Olhoff. Minimization of sound radiation from vibrating bi-material structures using topology optimization.Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 33(4-5):305–321, February 2007. ISSN 1615-147X, 1615-1488. doi: 10.1007/s00158-006-0088-9. URLhttp://li...

    2007 doi

  34. [44]

    Gil Ho Yoon, Jakob Søndergaard Jensen, and Ole Sigmund. Topology optimization of acoustic–structure interaction problems using a mixed finite element formulation.International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 70(9):1049–1075, May 2007. ISSN 0029-5981, 1097-0207. d...

    2007 doi

  35. [45]

    D¨ uhring, Jakob S

    Maria B. D¨ uhring, Jakob S. Jensen, and Ole Sigmund. Acoustic design by topology optimization.Journal of Sound and Vibration, 317(3-5):557–575, November 2008. ISSN 0022460X. doi: 10.1016/j.jsv.2008.03.042. URL https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0022460X08002812

    2008 doi

  36. [46]

    Jensen, and Semyung Wang

    Junghwan Kook, Kunmo Koo, Jaeyub Hyun, Jakob S. Jensen, and Semyung Wang. Acoustical topology optimization for Zwicker’s loudness model – Application to noise barriers.Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 237-240:130–151, September 2012. ISSN 00457825. doi: 1...

    2012 doi

  37. [47]

    Jensen and O

    J.S. Jensen and O. Sigmund. Topology optimization for nano-photonics.Laser & Photonics Reviews, 5(2): 308–321, March 2011. ISSN 1863-8880, 1863-8899. doi: 10.1002/lpor.201000014. URLhttps://onlinelibrar y.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lpor.201000014

    2011 doi

  38. [48]

    Christiansen and Ole Sigmund

    Rasmus E. Christiansen and Ole Sigmund. Inverse design in photonics by topology optimization: tutorial. Journal of the Optical Society of America B, 38(2):496, February 2021. ISSN 0740-3224, 1520-8540. doi: 10.1364/JOSAB.406048. URLhttps://opg.optica.org/abstract.cfm?URI=josab...

    2021 doi

  39. [49]

    Christiansen and Ole Sigmund

    Rasmus E. Christiansen and Ole Sigmund. Compact 200 line MATLAB code for inverse design in photonics by topology optimization: tutorial.Journal of the Optical Society of America B, 38(2):510, February 2021. ISSN 0740-3224, 1520-8540. doi: 10.1364/JOSAB.405955. URLhttps://opg.o...

    2021 doi

  40. [50]

    Scalable parallel programming with CUDA

    John Nickolls, Ian Buck, Michael Garland, and Kevin Skadron. Scalable parallel programming with CUDA. InACM SIGGRAPH 2008 classes, pages 1–14, Los Angeles California, August 2008. ACM. ISBN 978-1-4503- 7845-1. doi: 10.1145/1401132.1401152. URLhttps://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/140...

    2008

  41. [51]

    A Memory Efficient Adjoint Method to Enable Billion Parameter Optimization on a Single GPU in Dynamic Problems [Software], September

    Leon Herrmann, Tim B¨ urchner, L´ aszl´ o Kudela, and Stefan Kollmannsberger. A Memory Efficient Adjoint Method to Enable Billion Parameter Optimization on a Single GPU in Dynamic Problems [Software], September

  42. [52]

    Kingma and Jimmy Ba

    Diederik P. Kingma and Jimmy Ba. Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization.arXiv:1412.6980 [cs], January 2017. URLhttp://arxiv.org/abs/1412.6980

    2017 arXiv

  43. [53]

    Liu and Jorge Nocedal

    Dong C. Liu and Jorge Nocedal. On the limited memory BFGS method for large scale optimization.Math- ematical Programming, 45(1):503–528, August 1989. ISSN 1436-4646. doi: 10.1007/BF01589116. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01589116

    1989 doi

  44. [54]

    The method of moving asymptotes—a new method for structural optimization.International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 24(2):359–373, February 1987

    Krister Svanberg. The method of moving asymptotes—a new method for structural optimization.International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 24(2):359–373, February 1987. ISSN 0029-5981, 1097-0207. doi: 10.1002/nme.1620240207. URLhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...

    1987 doi

  45. [55]

    Oliphant, Matt Haberland, Tyler Reddy, David Cournapeau, Ev- 27 geni Burovski, Pearu Peterson, Warren Weckesser, Jonathan Bright, St´ efan J

    Pauli Virtanen, Ralf Gommers, Travis E. Oliphant, Matt Haberland, Tyler Reddy, David Cournapeau, Ev- 27 geni Burovski, Pearu Peterson, Warren Weckesser, Jonathan Bright, St´ efan J. Van Der Walt, Matthew Brett, Joshua Wilson, K. Jarrod Millman, Nikolay Mayorov, Andrew R. J. Ne...

    2020

  46. [56]

    Immersed boundary parametrizations for full waveform inversion.Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 406:115893, March

    Tim B¨ urchner, Philipp Kopp, Stefan Kollmannsberger, and Ernst Rank. Immersed boundary parametrizations for full waveform inversion.Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 406:115893, March

  47. [57]

    Fichtner, H

    A. Fichtner, H. P. Bunge, and H. Igel. The adjoint method in seismology: I. Theory.Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors, 157(1):86–104, August 2006. ISSN 0031-9201. doi: 10.1016/j.pepi.2006.03.016. URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0031920106001051

    2006 doi

  48. [58]

    Fichtner, H

    A. Fichtner, H. P. Bunge, and H. Igel. The adjoint method in seismology—: II. Applications: traveltimes and sensitivity functionals.Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors, 157(1):105–123, August 2006. ISSN 0031-9201. doi: 10.1016/j.pepi.2006.03.018. URLhttps://www.scienc...

    2006 doi

  49. [59]

    Isogeometric multi-resolution full waveform inversion based on the finite cell method.Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 417:116286, December 2023

    Tim B¨ urchner, Philipp Kopp, Stefan Kollmannsberger, and Ernst Rank. Isogeometric multi-resolution full waveform inversion based on the finite cell method.Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 417:116286, December 2023. ISSN 0045-7825. doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2023...

    2023

  50. [60]

    Solving inverse problems using data-driven models.Acta Numerica, 28:1–174, May 2019

    Simon Arridge, Peter Maass, Ozan ¨Oktem, and Carola-Bibiane Sch¨ onlieb. Solving inverse problems using data-driven models.Acta Numerica, 28:1–174, May 2019. ISSN 0962-4929, 1474-0508. doi: 10.1017/S0962492 919000059. URLhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/acta-numerica/ar...

    2019 doi

  51. [61]

    J. K. Guest, J. H. Pr´ evost, and T. Belytschko. Achieving minimum length scale in topology optimization using nodal design variables and projection functions.International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 61(2):238–254, September 2004. ISSN 0029-5981, 1097-0207. ...

    2004 doi

  52. [62]

    On projection methods, convergence and robust formulations in topology optimization.Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 43(6):767–784, June

    Fengwen Wang, Boyan Stefanov Lazarov, and Ole Sigmund. On projection methods, convergence and robust formulations in topology optimization.Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 43(6):767–784, June

  53. [63]

    Volume preserving projection filters and continuation methods in topology optimization.Engineering Structures, 85:144–161, February 2015

    Lei Li and Kapil Khandelwal. Volume preserving projection filters and continuation methods in topology optimization.Engineering Structures, 85:144–161, February 2015. ISSN 0141-0296. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct. 2014.10.052. URLhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0...

    2015 doi

  54. [64]

    M. P. Bendsøe. Optimal shape design as a material distribution problem.Structural optimization, 1(4):193–202, December 1989. ISSN 1615-1488. doi: 10.1007/BF01650949. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1007/BF01650949

    1989 doi

  55. [65]

    M. P. Bendsøe and O. Sigmund. Material interpolation schemes in topology optimization.Archive of Applied Mechanics, 69(9):635–654, November 1999. ISSN 1432-0681. doi: 10.1007/s004190050248. URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1007/s004190050248

    1999 doi

  56. [66]

    Bendsøe and O

    Martin P. Bendsøe and O. Sigmund.Topology optimization: theory, methods, and applications. Springer, Berlin ; New York, 2003. ISBN 978-3-540-42992-0

    2003

  57. [67]

    Alicia Kim

    Jaeyub Hyun and H. Alicia Kim. Transient level-set topology optimization of a planar acoustic lens working with short-duration pulse.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 149(5):3010–3026, May 2021. ISSN 0001-4966, 1520-8524. doi: 10.1121/10.0004819. URLhttps://pub...

    2021 doi

  58. [68]

    Dilgen and Niels Aage

    Cetin B. Dilgen and Niels Aage. Topology optimization of transient vibroacoustic problems for broadband filter design using cut elements.Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, 234:104123, July 2024. ISSN 0168-874X. doi: 10.1016/j.finel.2024.104123. URLhttps://www.sciencedirec...

    2024

  59. [69]

    Conlon, and Fabio Semperlotti

    Adrien Pelat, Fran¸ cois Gautier, Stephen C. Conlon, and Fabio Semperlotti. The acoustic black hole: A review of theory and applications.Journal of Sound and Vibration, 476:115316, June 2020. ISSN 0022-460X. doi: 10 .1016/j.jsv.2020.115316. URLhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/sci...

    2020

  60. [70]

    Topology optimization of a waveguide acoustic black hole for enhanced wave focusing.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 155(1): 742–756, January 2024

    Abbas Mousavi, Martin Berggren, Linus H¨ agg, and Eddie Wadbro. Topology optimization of a waveguide acoustic black hole for enhanced wave focusing.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 155(1): 742–756, January 2024. ISSN 1520-8524. doi: 10.1121/10.0024470

    2024 doi

  61. [71]

    On neu- ral networks for generating better local optima in topology optimization.Structural and Multidisciplinary 28 Optimization, 67(11):192, November 2024

    Leon Herrmann, Ole Sigmund, Viola Muning Li, Christian Vogl, and Stefan Kollmannsberger. On neu- ral networks for generating better local optima in topology optimization.Structural and Multidisciplinary 28 Optimization, 67(11):192, November 2024. ISSN 1615-1488. doi: 10.1007/s...

    2024 doi

  62. [72]

    Sigmund and J

    O. Sigmund and J. Petersson. Numerical instabilities in topology optimization: A survey on procedures dealing with checkerboards, mesh-dependencies and local minima.Structural optimization, 16(1):68–75, August 1998. ISSN 1615-1488. doi: 10.1007/BF01214002. URLhttps://doi.org/1...

    1998 doi

  63. [73]

    Bruns and Daniel A

    Tyler E. Bruns and Daniel A. Tortorelli. Topology optimization of non-linear elastic structures and compliant mechanisms.Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 190(26):3443–3459, March 2001. ISSN 0045-7825. doi: 10.1016/S0045-7825(00)00278-4. URLhttps://www.sci...

    2001 doi

  64. [74]

    Filters in topology optimization.International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 50(9):2143–2158, March 2001

    Blaise Bourdin. Filters in topology optimization.International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 50(9):2143–2158, March 2001. ISSN 0029-5981, 1097-0207. doi: 10.1002/nme.116. URLhttps://onlinelibr ary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/nme.116

    2001 doi

  65. [75]

    Lazarov, and Ole Sigmund

    Niels Aage, Erik Andreassen, Boyan S. Lazarov, and Ole Sigmund. Giga-voxel computational morphogenesis for structural design.Nature, 550(7674):84–86, October 2017. ISSN 1476-4687. doi: 10.1038/nature23911. URLhttps://www.nature.com/articles/nature23911

    2017 doi

  66. [76]

    Christiansen, Boyan S

    Rasmus E. Christiansen, Boyan S. Lazarov, Jakob S. Jensen, and Ole Sigmund. Creating geometrically robust designs for highly sensitive problems using topology optimization: Acoustic cavity design.Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 52(4):737–754, October 2015. ISSN ...

    2015 doi

  67. [77]

    Morphology-based black and white filters for topology optimization.Structural and Multidis- ciplinary Optimization, 33(4):401–424, April 2007

    Ole Sigmund. Morphology-based black and white filters for topology optimization.Structural and Multidis- ciplinary Optimization, 33(4):401–424, April 2007. ISSN 1615-1488. doi: 10.1007/s00158-006-0087-x. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-006-0087-x

    2007 doi

  68. [78]

    Manufacturing tolerant topology optimization.Acta Mechanica Sinica, 25(2):227–239, April 2009

    Ole Sigmund. Manufacturing tolerant topology optimization.Acta Mechanica Sinica, 25(2):227–239, April 2009. ISSN 1614-3116. doi: 10.1007/s10409-009-0240-z. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10409-009-0240-z

    2009 doi

  69. [79]

    Springer International Publish- ing, Cham, 2017

    Hans Petter Langtangen and Svein Linge.Finite Difference Computing with PDEs: A Modern Software Approach, volume 16 ofTexts in Computational Science and Engineering. Springer International Publish- ing, Cham, 2017. ISBN 978-3-319-55455-6 978-3-319-55456-3. doi: 10.1007/978-3-3...

    2017 doi

  70. [80]

    On the Use of Neural Networks for Full Waveform Inversion [Software], August 2024

    Leon Herrmann, Tim B¨ urchner, Felix Dietrich, and Stefan Kollmannsberger. On the Use of Neural Networks for Full Waveform Inversion [Software], August 2024. URLhttps://data.mendeley.com/datasets/7kps2hnj6g/2

    2024

  71. [81]

    The inverse crime, January 2004

    Armand Wirgin. The inverse crime, January 2004. URLhttp://arxiv.org/abs/math- ph/0401050. arXiv:math-ph/0401050

    2004

  72. [82]

    Lecture notes on inverse theory, 07 2021

    Andreas Fichtner. Lecture notes on inverse theory, 07 2021. This content is a preprint and has not been peer-reviewed

    2021

  73. [83]

    L. Hug, M. Potten, G. Stockinger, K. Thuro, and S. Kollmannsberger. A three-field phase-field model for mixed- mode fracture in rock based on experimental determination of the mode II fracture toughness.Engineering with Computers, 38(6):5563–5581, December 2022. ISSN 0177-0667...

    2022 doi

  74. [84]

    Finite cell method.Computational Mechanics, 41(1): 121–133, December 2007

    Jamshid Parvizian, Alexander D¨ uster, and Ernst Rank. Finite cell method.Computational Mechanics, 41(1): 121–133, December 2007. ISSN 1432-0924. doi: 10.1007/s00466-007-0173-y. URLhttps://doi.org/10.100 7/s00466-007-0173-y

    2007 doi

  75. [85]

    The\textlessspan style=”font-variant:small- caps;”\textgreaterp\textless/span\textgreater -Version of the Finite Element and Finite Cell Methods

    Alexander D¨ uster, Ernst Rank, and Barna Szab´ o. The\textlessspan style=”font-variant:small- caps;”\textgreaterp\textless/span\textgreater -Version of the Finite Element and Finite Cell Methods. In Erwin Stein, Ren´ e Borst, and Thomas J R Hughes, editors,Encyclopedia of Com...

    2017 doi

  76. [86]

    O. Sigmund. A 99 line topology optimization code written in Matlab.Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 21(2):120–127, April 2001. ISSN 1615-1488. doi: 10.1007/s001580050176. URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1007/s001580050176

    2001 doi

  77. [87]

    Jeff Bezanson, Alan Edelman, Stefan Karpinski, and Viral B. Shah. Julia: A Fresh Approach to Numerical Computing.SIAM Review, 59(1):65–98, January 2017. ISSN 0036-1445, 1095-7200. doi: 10.1137/141000671. URLhttps://epubs.siam.org/doi/10.1137/141000671

    2017 doi

  78. [88]

    Attention is All you Need

    Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Lukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. Attention is All you Need. InAdvances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 30. Curran Associates, Inc., 2017. URLhttps://papers.nips.cc/pape...

    2017

  79. [89]

    Compute Trends Across Three Eras of Machine Learning

    Jaime Sevilla, Lennart Heim, Anson Ho, Tamay Besiroglu, Marius Hobbhahn, and Pablo Villalobos. Compute Trends Across Three Eras of Machine Learning. In2022 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN), pages 1–8, July 2022. doi: 10.1109/IJCNN55064.2022.9891914. UR...

    2022

  80. [90]

    The Neural Network Approach to Inverse Problems in Differential Equations, January 2019

    Kailai Xu and Eric Darve. The Neural Network Approach to Inverse Problems in Differential Equations, January 2019. URLhttp://arxiv.org/abs/1901.07758

    2019 arXiv

  81. [91]

    Neural networks as smooth priors for inverse problems for PDEs.Journal of Computational Mathematics and Data Science, 1:100008, September 2021

    Jens Berg and Kaj Nystr¨ om. Neural networks as smooth priors for inverse problems for PDEs.Journal of Computational Mathematics and Data Science, 1:100008, September 2021. ISSN 27724158. doi: 10.1016/j.jc mds.2021.100008. URLhttps://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S27724...

    2021

  82. [92]

    Weiqiang Zhu, Kailai Xu, Eric Darve, Biondo Biondi, and Gregory C. Beroza. Integrating deep neural net- works with full-waveform inversion: Reparameterization, regularization, and uncertainty quantification.GEO- PHYSICS, 87(1):R93–R109, January 2022. ISSN 0016-8033, 1942-2156....

    2022 doi

  83. [93]

    Full waveform inversion based on 29 inversion network reparameterized velocity.Geophysical Prospecting, 72(1):52–67, January 2024

    Peng Jiang, Qingyang Wang, Yuxiao Ren, Senlin Yang, and Ningbo Li. Full waveform inversion based on 29 inversion network reparameterized velocity.Geophysical Prospecting, 72(1):52–67, January 2024. ISSN 0016- 8025, 1365-2478. doi: 10.1111/1365-2478.13292. URLhttps://onlinelibr...

    2024

  84. [94]

    Accelerating full waveform inversion by transfer learning.Computational Mechanics, February 2025

    Divya Shyam Singh, Leon Herrmann, Qing Sun, Tim B¨ urchner, Felix Dietrich, and Stefan Kollmannsberger. Accelerating full waveform inversion by transfer learning.Computational Mechanics, February 2025. ISSN 1432-0924. doi: 10.1007/s00466-025-02600-w. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1007...

    2025 doi

  85. [95]

    Deep Reparameterization for Full Waveform Inversion: Architecture Benchmarking, Robust Inversion, and Multiphysics Extension, April 2025

    Feng Liu, Yaxing Li, Rui Su, Jianping Huang, and Lei Bai. Deep Reparameterization for Full Waveform Inversion: Architecture Benchmarking, Robust Inversion, and Multiphysics Extension, April 2025. URLhttp: //arxiv.org/abs/2504.17375. arXiv:2504.17375

    2025 arXiv

  86. [96]

    Lucas Norder, Shunyu Yin, Matthijs H. J. de Jong, Francesco Stallone, Hande Aydogmus, Paolo M. Sberna, Miguel A. Bessa, and Richard A. Norte. Pentagonal photonic crystal mirrors: scalable lightsails with enhanced acceleration via neural topology optimization.Nature Communicati...

    2025

  87. [97]

    Neural reparameterization improves structural optimization, September 2019

    Stephan Hoyer, Jascha Sohl-Dickstein, and Sam Greydanus. Neural reparameterization improves structural optimization, September 2019. URLhttp://arxiv.org/abs/1909.04240

    2019 arXiv

  88. [98]

    Hao Deng and Albert C. To. Topology optimization based on deep representation learning (DRL) for compliance and stress-constrained design.Computational Mechanics, 66(2):449–469, August 2020. ISSN 1432-0924. doi: 10.1007/s00466-020-01859-5. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s00466-020-01859-5

    2020 doi

  89. [99]

    A New Topology Optimization Approach by Physics-Informed Deep Learning Process.Advances in Science, Technology and Engineering Systems Journal, 6(4):233–240, July 2021

    Liang Chen and Mo-How Herman Shen. A New Topology Optimization Approach by Physics-Informed Deep Learning Process.Advances in Science, Technology and Engineering Systems Journal, 6(4):233–240, July 2021. ISSN 24156698, 24156698. doi: 10.25046/aj060427. URLhttps://astesj.com/v0...

    2021 doi

  90. [100]

    TOuNN: Topology Optimization using Neural Networks.Struc- tural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 63(3):1135–1149, March 2021

    Aaditya Chandrasekhar and Krishnan Suresh. TOuNN: Topology Optimization using Neural Networks.Struc- tural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 63(3):1135–1149, March 2021. ISSN 1615-147X, 1615-1488. doi: 10.1007/s00158-020-02748-4. URLhttp://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00158-02...

    2021 doi

  91. [101]

    Multi-Material Topology Optimization Using Neural Networks

    Aaditya Chandrasekhar and Krishnan Suresh. Multi-Material Topology Optimization Using Neural Networks. Computer-Aided Design, 136:103017, July 2021. ISSN 0010-4485. doi: 10.1016/j.cad.2021.103017. URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010448521000282

    2021

  92. [102]

    Approximate Length Scale Filter in Topology Optimization using Fourier Enhanced Neural Networks.Computer-Aided Design, 150:103277, September 2022

    Aaditya Chandrasekhar and Krishnan Suresh. Approximate Length Scale Filter in Topology Optimization using Fourier Enhanced Neural Networks.Computer-Aided Design, 150:103277, September 2022. ISSN 0010-

    2022

  93. [103]

    Mallon, Aaron W

    Connor N. Mallon, Aaron W. Thornton, Matthew R. Hill, and Santiago Badia. Neural Level Set Topology Optimization Using Unfitted Finite Elements, February 2024. URLhttp://arxiv.org/abs/2303.13672

    2024 arXiv

  94. [104]

    Aragon, and Miguel A

    Suryanarayanan Manoj Sanu, Alejandro M. Aragon, and Miguel A. Bessa. Neural topology optimization: the good, the bad, and the ugly, July 2024. URLhttp://arxiv.org/abs/2407.13954

    2024

  95. [105]

    Igor Kuszczak, Gawel Kus, Federico Bosi, and Miguel A. Bessa. Meta-neural Topology Optimization: Knowl- edge Infusion with Meta-learning, February 2025. URLhttp://arxiv.org/abs/2502.01830. arXiv:2502.01830. 30

    2025 arXiv

  96. [1723]

    URLhttps://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-57749-y

    doi: 10.1038/s41467-025-57749-y. URLhttps://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-57749-y

    doi

  97. [2005]

    doi: 10.1109/TNN.2004.841799

    ISSN 1941-0093. doi: 10.1109/TNN.2004.841799. URLhttps://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/140 2508

    1941

  98. [2011]

    doi: 10.1007/s00158-010-0602-y

    ISSN 1615-1488. doi: 10.1007/s00158-010-0602-y. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-010-0602-y

    doi

  99. [2023]

    doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2023.115893

    ISSN 0045-7825. doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2023.115893. URLhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar ticle/pii/S0045782523000166

    2023

  100. [2025]

    URLhttps://zenodo.org/doi/10.5281/zenodo.17157434

    doi

  101. [4485]

    URLhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S00104 48522000574

    doi: 10.1016/j.cad.2022.103277. URLhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S00104 48522000574

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.