The reviewed record of science sign in
Pith

arxiv: 2109.09444 · v7 · pith:CV57W7OJ · submitted 2021-09-20 · cs.LG · cs.NA· math.DS· math.NA· stat.ML

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

Reviewed by Pith T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 kernel pith:CV57W7OJrecord.jsonopen to challenge →

classification cs.LG cs.NAmath.DSmath.NAstat.ML
keywords generalizationxpinnspinnsdecompositionnetworkswhenbecomebound
0
0 comments X
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.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. Adaptive Domain Decomposition Physics-Informed Neural Networks for Traffic State Estimation with Sparse Sensor Data

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    ADD-PINN adaptively decomposes the spatial domain based on PINN residuals and a shock indicator to improve offline traffic state estimation under the LWR model, outperforming baselines in most sparse-sensor cases whil...

  2. Faster by Design: Interactive Aerodynamics via Neural Surrogates Trained on Expert-Validated CFD

    cs.LG 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    A graph-based neural operator trained on expert-validated race-car CFD data reaches accuracy levels usable for early-stage interactive aerodynamic design exploration.

  3. Estimating Parameter Fields in Multi-Physics PDEs from Scarce Measurements

    cs.LG 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Neptune infers spatiotemporal parameter fields in PDEs from as few as 45 sparse measurements using independent coordinate neural networks, outperforming PINNs and neural operators with lower errors and better extrapolation.

  4. Beyond Data-Driven: How Physics-Informed Neural Networks are Reshaping Multi-Physics Design and Discovery

    physics.optics 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 1.0

    A review assessing PINN advances for forward modeling, inverse design, and equation discovery across multi-physics domains.