The Well: a Large-Scale Collection of Diverse Physics Simulations for Machine Learning

Blakesley Burkhart; Bruno R\'egaldo-Saint Blancard; Daniel Fortunato; Drummond B. Fielding; Fran\c{c}ois Rozet; Fruzsina J. Agocs; Jared A. Goldberg; Jeff Shen; Jonah Miller; Keaton Burns

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 3 cited by

The Well: a Large-Scale Collection of Diverse Physics Simulations for Machine Learning

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The Well contributes 15TB of physics simulation data and shows standard surrogate models often cannot beat a constant-mean predictor.

desk verdict A genuinely useful dataset collection worth having, but the paper's physical-fidelity claims outrun the evidence and the baselines are too underpowered to rank models. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.00568 v2 pith:NXJPZ7A3 submitted 2024-11-30 cs.LG physics.flu-dyn

Ruben Ohana , Michael McCabe , Lucas Meyer , Rudy Morel , Fruzsina J. Agocs , Miguel Beneitez , Marsha Berger , Blakesley Burkhart

show 19 more authors

Keaton Burns Stuart B. Dalziel Drummond B. Fielding Daniel Fortunato Jared A. Goldberg Keiya Hirashima Yan-Fei Jiang Rich R. Kerswell Suryanarayana Maddu Jonah Miller Payel Mukhopadhyay Stefan S. Nixon Jeff Shen Romain Watteaux Bruno Régaldo-Saint Blancard François Rozet Liam H. Parker Miles Cranmer Shirley Ho

This is my paper · ORCID

classification cs.LGphysics.flu-dyn

keywords physicssimulationdatasetssurrogatemodelingbenchmarksuitespatiotemporalpredictionneuraloperatorspartialdifferentialequationsdatasetreleasevariance-scaledRMSE

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

The paper introduces the Well, a 15-terabyte collection of 16 numerical simulation datasets spanning a wide range of spatiotemporal physics, from acoustic scattering and reaction-diffusion to magnetohydrodynamic turbulence and supernova explosions. It argues that existing physics-oriented machine-learning benchmarks cover too narrow a class of behavior, and that this collection offers the volume, diversity, and difficulty needed to evaluate surrogate models and to push toward general-purpose physics models. To support that claim, the paper reports baseline experiments: four standard surrogate architectures trained with a modest compute budget frequently score above 1 on a variance-scaled error, meaning a constant-mean prediction would have been better, and longer autoregressive rollouts often score above 10. The release also includes a common file format and a unified Python interface, so the datasets can be used individually or as a benchmark suite.

What carries the argument

The defining object is the collection itself, organized by a shared self-documenting archive specification that stores state fields as arrays indexed by trajectory, time, and spatial coordinates, together with metadata for physical parameters and boundary conditions, and read through a uniform Python dataset loader. The benchmark's organizing metric is variance-scaled root mean squared error, $\mathrm{VRMSE}(u,v)=\sqrt{\langle |u-v|^2\rangle / \langle |v-\bar v|^2\rangle}$, so a score of 1 means the model does no better than predicting the spatial mean and scores above 1 mean worse than that trivial predictor. The working task in the reported baselines is autoregressive next-snapshot prediction from a four-step history, with trajectories split 80/10/10 into training, validation, and test.

What would settle it

Train a competitive model on each of the 16 datasets without the 12-hour cap and with per-field loss normalization; if test VRMSE falls below 1 on nearly all datasets while the paper's reported baselines stay above it, the claim that these tasks challenge current surrogate models would be weakened.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the Well provides a benchmark collection that is simultaneously large, diverse, and demanding: 16 datasets totaling 15TB of temporally coarsened snapshots from expert simulations, stored on uniform grids under a shared self-documenting format and accessed through a common Python interface. In the paper's own baseline experiments, off-the-shelf architectures trained for about 12 hours on one GPU fail to beat a constant-spatial-mean predictor on several one-step tasks and on most longer rollouts; for example, the rayleigh_taylor_instability dataset yields a variance-scaled RMSE above 10 for all four tested models. The authors take this as evidence that the suite poses new challenges that will inform the next generation of data-driven surrogates, and they emphasize that the baselines are deliberately simplistic rather than tuned peak performance.

Load-bearing premise

The benchmark's difficulty claims rest on the assumption that the stored snapshots, downsampled by factors often above 100 and sometimes under-resolved, still faithfully represent the target physics, so that models trained on the Well learn physics rather than solver artifacts.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Several one-step tasks and most longer rollouts beat the constant-mean predictor, with VRMSE above 10 on rayleigh_taylor_instability and on later windows of rayleigh_benard and shear_flow; new methods are needed for these regimes.
No architecture class dominates: U-net-style models win 9 of 17 one-step experiments and spectral models win 8, suggesting one-model-fits-all surrogate approaches may struggle.
One-step accuracy does not guarantee rollout accuracy: time-averaged losses over windows 13-30 are often far worse, and sometimes decrease because dissipative systems become smoother.
The common format and interface let third-party datasets be added without modification to the code base.
Beyond the forward problem, several datasets are positioned for inverse scattering, super-resolution, cross-dimensional transfer, parameter-range generalization, and long-term stability studies.

Reading between the lines

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

A natural test the paper does not run is generalization across the included parameter ranges, such as training on some Gray-Scott (f,k) pattern families and testing on held-out ones; this would directly probe whether the suite measures physical understanding or only interpolation.
Because the authors concede that many simulations are under-resolved and that temporal downsampling often exceeds a factor of 100, part of the measured difficulty may be solver-specific; re-running one dataset at higher resolution or with denser snapshots would separate learned physics from learned artifacts.
The VRMSE normalization centers on the spatial mean of each field, so the same model error can look very different for fields whose mean is near zero versus bounded away from zero; comparing with uncentered normalization could change model rankings.
The collection's uniform schema makes it a plausible testbed for multi-physics pretraining and transfer, a direction the paper motivates in passing but does not evaluate.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Bottom line: this is a solid, useful dataset release, and it deserves a serious referee. The value is infrastructural rather than scientific: 15 TB, 16 datasets, a common HDF5 spec, a clean PyTorch interface, and a remarkably candid datasheet. The authors generated the data with established solvers, and they ship code and generation scripts where possible. That is real, citable work.

What is actually new is the aggregation and unification. Prior benchmarks were either small and simple (PDEBench-style) or large and single-domain (ClimSim, BLASTNet). The Well is the first at this scale to combine research-frontier simulations from multiple fields with a single interface and baseline harness. The domain-expert involvement shows in the dataset choice and metadata.

The soft spots are real but not fatal. First, the stress-test concern lands: Appendix A.4 Q13 admits many simulations are under-resolved, and Q31 says temporal downsampling often exceeds 100x. The introduction calls the data "high quality numerical simulations," and the benchmark section implies tasks measure physical prediction. But there is no quantitative analysis of how much physical content survives. The natural control exists—MHD_64 was downsampled from MHD_256, and supernova_explosion has two resolutions—and the paper does not use it to check whether models learn physics or solver artifacts. This does not sink the paper, because for many ML applications, learning a solver's coarse-grid behavior is still useful. But the claim "does not affect the majority of use cases" is an assertion, not a demonstration.

Second, the baselines are underpowered. No error bars (checklist admits), and four datasets get fewer than 5 training epochs within the 12-hour budget. The paper is upfront that these are example baselines, so this is a limitation rather than a flaw. Still, Tables 2 and 3 should not be read as reliable model rankings; close calls are noise.

Who is this for? Researchers building or evaluating surrogate models who need a diverse benchmark suite. It is the most useful public option at this scale. I would bring it to reading group and I would cite it. A revision should add a resolution-sensitivity analysis (using the paired datasets) and error bars for at least a few representative runs. With those, this becomes a standard reference.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper introduces the Well, a 15 TB collection of 16 (per the abstract) physics simulation datasets intended to support machine-learning surrogate modeling of spatiotemporal physical systems. The datasets cover a wide range of problems, from acoustic scattering and active matter to magnetohydrodynamics, supernova explosions, and viscoelastic instabilities, and are stored in a unified HDF5 format with a provided PyTorch interface. The authors present baseline results with FNO, TFNO, U-net, and CNextU-net on one-step prediction and autoregressive rollout tasks, using variance-scaled RMSE (VRMSE) as the primary metric. The paper emphasizes diversity, scale, and the difficulty of the resulting benchmark tasks, noting that several baseline models fail to beat a constant-mean predictor.

Significance. If the underlying simulations faithfully represent the target physics, the Well would be a valuable community resource: it combines scale, diversity, domain-expert involvement, open code and data distribution, a self-documenting data specification, and a flexible benchmarking library. The inclusion of two-resolution versions of MHD and supernova simulations, the use of standard external model architectures, and the transparent reporting of hyperparameters and data-generation details are notable strengths. The benchmark results convincingly show that generic off-the-shelf models struggle on many of these tasks, which supports the paper's motivating claim that more challenging and diverse datasets are needed. However, the paper's central claim that these are 'high quality numerical simulations' suitable for benchmarking physical surrogate models is not yet fully supported, because the effects of under-resolution and aggressive temporal downsampling on physical fidelity are not quantified.

major comments (3)

[Appendix A.4 (Q13, Q31); Section 1; Section 4] The paper's central claim that the Well contains 'high quality numerical simulations' and that the VRMSE scores in Tables 2 and 3 measure physical surrogate-model skill rests on the assumption that the stored snapshots faithfully represent the target dynamics. Appendix A.4 Q13 concedes that 'many of these simulations are under-resolved given the equation parameters used' and frames this as implicit large-eddy-simulation viscosity, while Q31 states that temporal downsampling 'often occurs by factors upwards of 100.' These admissions are not accompanied by any quantitative evidence—such as spectral convergence checks, spatial resolution studies, or comparisons between the low-resolution stored data and higher-resolution references—that the retained fields still capture the physically relevant behavior. The two-resolution datasets (MHD_64/MHD_256 and supernova_explosion_64/128) provide a natural control for exactly this question, but the paper does not use them for that purpose. I request a quantitative resolution-fidelity analysis, or a clear and prominent restatement of the benchmark's scope as measuring prediction of a particular solver's coarse-grid dynamics rather than of the underlying physical system.
[Section E.1, Table 6, Checklist item 3(c)] Several reported benchmark results come from models that saw fewer than five epochs within the 12-hour compute budget; for example, Table 6 shows CNextU-net at 1 epoch on euler_multi_quadrants, 3 epochs on turbulence_gravity_cooling, and 3 epochs on turbulent_radiative_layer_3D, and FNO/TFNO at 4 epochs on euler_multi_quadrants. The checklist explicitly states that no error bars are reported. Without seed variance or at least an explicit marker for under-trained runs, the model-comparison claims in Section 4 (e.g., '9/17 favor U-net type models while 8 favor spectral') are not robust, and close entries in Table 2 (e.g., acoustic_scattering, MHD_64, turbulent_radiative_layer_3D) could change with additional training or random seeds. Please report multiple random seeds for at least the contested datasets, or clearly flag which results are limited by the time budget and refrain from architectural conclusions based on those entries.
[Section 4, Tables 2 and 3] The one-step results in Table 2 and the rollout results in Table 3 use different evaluation protocols (sliding windows from ground truth vs. rollouts initiated from the beginning of the simulation), and the paper explains that the two settings can therefore disagree. However, the claim that 'loss sometimes decreases in later windows' due to dissipative physics is not supported by the aggregated window averages in Table 3 alone. I recommend showing per-dataset windowed VRMSE curves, ideally with confidence intervals, so that the reader can distinguish physical dissipation from trajectory-dependent variability; alternatively, state explicitly that the current table does not allow such a distinction.

minor comments (3)

[Table 1 and Section 3.1.7/3.2] Table 1 contains 17 rows (counting MHD and supernova_explosion as single rows with two resolutions each), while the abstract states '16 datasets.' Please clarify whether MHD_64/MHD_256 and supernova_explosion_64/128 are each counted as one dataset or two, and make the numbering consistent throughout.
[Section 3.1.9] The phrase 'reddening glow called akilonova' should be corrected to 'a kilonova.'
[Section 4 and Appendix A.4 Q13] The limitations discussion in the main text (Section 5) does not mention the under-resolution and temporal-downsampling caveats that appear only in the appendix. Since these are central to the benchmark's interpretation, they should be stated, at least briefly, in the main text.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the dataset construction and benchmark evaluation are self-contained, and self-citations serve only as data provenance, not as load-bearing evidence.

full rationale

This is a dataset and benchmark paper rather than a derivation, so the circularity patterns relevant to theoretical claims do not apply in a load-bearing way. The central claims are that the Well contains 16 diverse simulation datasets totaling 15TB and that standard surrogate models face challenges on these tasks. These claims are supported by the data release itself and by benchmark experiments run with external, standard model architectures (FNO, TFNO, U-net, CNextU-net) using conventional train/validation/test splits and metrics defined in the paper. No parameter is fitted to a target result and then renamed a prediction; the VRMSE scores are empirical measurements on held-out test sets. The paper's self-citations, such as references to prior simulation papers for convective envelopes, active matter, shear flow, supernova explosions, and radiative mixing layers, are used to document the provenance and physical setup of the datasets, not to justify a uniqueness theorem or to import an ansatz. The appendix's admission that 'many of these simulations are under-resolved given the equation parameters used' (Appendix A.4, Q13) and that temporal downsampling 'often occurs by factors upwards of 100' (Q31) is a validity limitation about whether the benchmark measures physics rather than solver artifacts; it is a correctness concern, not a circularity concern. Even if the benchmark's physical fidelity were questioned, that would not make the paper's claims equivalent to their inputs by construction. Therefore the appropriate circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims are descriptive and infrastructural, so no free parameters are fitted to a target result. The main axioms are domain assumptions about simulation fidelity, downsampling adequacy, and metric validity, all acknowledged in the appendix.

assumptions (3)

domain assumption Numerical simulations are faithful ground truth for the studied physical phenomena.
The benchmark quality relies on the simulation data representing real dynamics, even though Appendix A.4 Q13 admits many runs are under-resolved.
ad hoc to paper Temporal downsampling preserves the challenge of the learning task.
Appendix A.4 Q30 says downsampling rates were chosen by domain experts so that identity prediction produces non-negligible error, which is a design choice, not derived from a quantitative criterion.
domain assumption The VRMSE metric is an appropriate measure of surrogate quality.
Section E.3 defines VRMSE and uses it to rank models; the choice of normalization affects conclusions, as the paper itself notes that NRMSE would weight fields differently.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The Well: a Large-Scale Collection of Diverse Physics Simulations for Machine Learning." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NXJPZ7A3

@misc{pith2026241200568,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The Well: a Large-Scale Collection of Diverse Physics Simulations for Machine Learning},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NXJPZ7A3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.00568}
}

read the original abstract

Machine learning based surrogate models offer researchers powerful tools for accelerating simulation-based workflows. However, as standard datasets in this space often cover small classes of physical behavior, it can be difficult to evaluate the efficacy of new approaches. To address this gap, we introduce the Well: a large-scale collection of datasets containing numerical simulations of a wide variety of spatiotemporal physical systems. The Well draws from domain experts and numerical software developers to provide 15TB of data across 16 datasets covering diverse domains such as biological systems, fluid dynamics, acoustic scattering, as well as magneto-hydrodynamic simulations of extra-galactic fluids or supernova explosions. These datasets can be used individually or as part of a broader benchmark suite. To facilitate usage of the Well, we provide a unified PyTorch interface for training and evaluating models. We demonstrate the function of this library by introducing example baselines that highlight the new challenges posed by the complex dynamics of the Well. The code and data is available at https://github.com/PolymathicAI/the_well.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.00568 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Top to bottom row: snapshots at t = {0, T 3 , 2T 3 , T} of acoustic_scattering, active_matter and convective_envelope_rsg. 3.1.4 euler_multi_quadrants The Euler equations model the behavior of inviscid fluids. These simulations specifically describe the evolution of compressible gases in a generalization of the classical Euler quadrants Riemann problem [66]. In these problems, initial discontinuities lead to shocks… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Top to bottom row: snapshots at t = {0, T 3 , 2T 3 , T} of euler_multi_quadrants, gray_scott_reaction_diffusion, and helmholtz_staircase [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Top to bottom row: snapshots at t = {0, T 3 , 2T 3 , T} of MHD, planetswe and post_neutron_star_merger. 3.1.8 planetswe The shallow water equations approximate incompressible fluid flows where the horizontal length scale is significantly larger than the vertical as a depth-integrated two-dimensional problem. They have played an important roll in the validation of dynamical cores for atmospheric dynamics as seen in t… view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (3 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Top to bottom row: snapshots at t = {0, T 3 , 2T 3 , T} of rayleigh_benard, rayleigh_taylor_instability and shear_flow. 3.1.9 post_neutron_star_merger After the in-spiral and merger of two neutron stars, a hot dense remnant is formed. These events, central to gamma ray…

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Top to bottom row: snapshots at t = {0, T 3 , 2T 3 , T} of supernova_explosion, turbulence_gravity_cooling turbulent_radiative_layer_2D and viscoelastic_instability. 3.3 turbulence_gravity_cooling Within the interstellar medium (ISM), turbulence, star formation, super…

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: The benchmark library included with the Well includes both coarse and fine level metrics. On [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. OpenAlex reports about 6 citations worldwide. Full citation record

Towards a Physics Foundation Model
cs.LG 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A single transformer-based model, GPhyT, trained on diverse 2D simulation data, predicts next states across several fluid and heat-transfer systems and extrapolates to similar unseen regimes with plausible results.
Neural Network Modeling of Microstructure Complexity Using Digital Libraries
cs.LG 2025-01 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

A leaky integrate-and-fire spiking network matches or beats recurrent convolutional networks on simulated crack growth and Turing pattern prediction while using far fewer parameters.
Predicting Change, Not States: An Alternate Framework for Neural PDE Surrogates
cs.LG 2024-12 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Predicting the temporal derivative and integrating it with an ODE solver improves accuracy and stability of neural PDE surrogates compared with direct next-state prediction.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

210 extracted references · 62 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

[1]

Eyring, S

V . Eyring, S. Bony, G. A. Meehl, C. A. Senior, B. Stevens, R. J. Stouffer, and K. E. T aylor. Overview of the coupled model intercomparison project phase 6 (cmip6) experimental design and organization. Geoscientific Model Development, 9(5):1937–1958, 2016

1937
[2]

Berger and Randall J

Marsha J. Berger and Randall J. LeV eque. Implicit adaptive mesh refinement for dispersive tsunami propagation, 2024

2024
[3]

Graphcast: Learning skillful medium-range global weather forecasting.arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.12794, 2022

Remi Lam, Alvaro Sanchez-Gonzalez, Matthew Willson, Peter Wirnsberger, Meire Fortunato, Ferran Alet, Suman Ravuri, Timo Ewalds, Zach Eaton-Rosen, W eihua Hu, et al. Graphcast: Learning skillful medium-range global weather forecasting.arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.12794, 2022

arXiv 2022
[4]

Large-scale pde-constrained optimization: an introduction

Lorenz T Biegler, Omar Ghattas, Matthias Heinkenschloss, and Bart van Bloemen W aanders. Large-scale pde-constrained optimization: an introduction. In Large-scale PDE-constrained optimization, pages 3–13. Springer, 2003

2003
[5]

Shape optimization in fluid mechanics.Annu

Bijan Mohammadi and Olivier Pironneau. Shape optimization in fluid mechanics.Annu. Rev . Fluid Mech., 36:255–279, 2004

2004
[6]

The frontier of simulation-based inference

Kyle Cranmer, Johann Brehmer, and Gilles Louppe. The frontier of simulation-based inference. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(48):30055–30062, 2020

2020
[7]

Simbig: Field-level simulation-based inference of galaxy clustering, 2023

Pablo Lemos, Liam Parker, ChangHoon Hahn, Shirley Ho, Michael Eickenberg, Jiamin Hou, Elena Massara, Chirag Modi, Azadeh Moradinezhad Dizgah, Bruno Regaldo-Saint Blancard, and David Spergel. Simbig: Field-level simulation-based inference of galaxy clustering, 2023

2023
[8]

American Mathematical Society, 2022

Lawrence C Evans.P artial differential equations, volume 19. American Mathematical Society, 2022. 11

2022

Show all 210 references

[9]

Queipo, Raphael T

Nestor V . Queipo, Raphael T . Haftka, W ei Shyy, Tushar Goel, Rajkumar V aidyanathan, and P . Kevin Tucker. Surrogate-based analysis and optimization.Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 41(1):1–28, 2005

2005
[10]

Forrester, A

A. Forrester, A. Sóbester, and A. Keane.Engineering Design via Surrogate Modelling: A Practical Guide. Wiley, 2008

2008
[11]

Surrogate modeling for fluid flows based on physics-constrained deep learning without simulation data.Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 361:112732, 2020

Luning Sun, Han Gao, Shaowu Pan, and Jian-Xun W ang. Surrogate modeling for fluid flows based on physics-constrained deep learning without simulation data.Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 361:112732, 2020

2020
[12]

Application of deep learning based multi-fidelity surrogate model to robust aerodynamic design optimization.Aerospace Science and T echnology, 92:722–737, 2019

Jun T ao and Gang Sun. Application of deep learning based multi-fidelity surrogate model to robust aerodynamic design optimization.Aerospace Science and T echnology, 92:722–737, 2019

2019
[13]

A physics- informed deep learning framework for inversion and surrogate modeling in solid mechanics

Ehsan Haghighat, Maziar Raissi, Adrian Moure, Hector Gomez, and Ruben Juanes. A physics- informed deep learning framework for inversion and surrogate modeling in solid mechanics. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 379:113741, 2021

2021
[14]

Neural-network quantum state tomography.Nature Physics, 14(5):447–450, 2018

Giacomo T orlai, Guglielmo Mazzola, Juan Carrasquilla, Matthias Troyer, Roger Melko, and Giuseppe Carleo. Neural-network quantum state tomography.Nature Physics, 14(5):447–450, 2018

2018
[15]

Deep learning and density-functional theory

Kevin Ryczko, David A Strubbe, and Isaac T amblyn. Deep learning and density-functional theory. Physical Review A, 100(2):022512, 2019

2019
[16]

Recent advances and applications of deep learning methods in materials science.npj Computational Materials, 8(1):59, 2022

Kamal Choudhary, Brian DeCost, Chi Chen, Anubhav Jain, Francesca T avazza, Ryan Cohn, Cheol W oo Park, Alok Choudhary, Ankit Agrawal, Simon JL Billinge, et al. Recent advances and applications of deep learning methods in materials science.npj Computational Materials, 8(1):59, 2022

2022
[17]

Martian time-series unraveled: A multi-scale nested approach with factorial variational autoencoders.arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.16189, 2023

Ali Siahkoohi, Rudy Morel, Randall Balestriero, Erwan Allys, Grégory Sainton, T aichi Kawamura, and Maarten V de Hoop. Martian time-series unraveled: A multi-scale nested approach with factorial variational autoencoders.arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.16189, 2023

2023
[18]

Plasma surrogate modelling using fourier neural operators, 2023

Vignesh Gopakumar, Stanislas Pamela, Lorenzo Zanisi, Zongyi Li, Ander Gray, Daniel Brennand, Nitesh Bhatia, Gregory Stathopoulos, Matt Kusner, Marc Peter Deisenroth, Anima Anandkumar, JOREK T eam, and MAST T eam. Plasma surrogate modelling using fourier neural operators, 2023

2023
[19]

Mahoney, and Amir Gholami

Shashank Subramanian, Peter Harrington, Kurt Keutzer, W ahid Bhimji, Dmitriy Morozov, Michael W . Mahoney, and Amir Gholami. T owards foundation models for scientific machine learning: Characterizing scaling and transfer behavior. InThirty-seventh Conference on Neural Informat...

2023
[20]

Convolutional neural operators for robust and accurate learning of pdes, 2023

Bogdan Raoni´c, Roberto Molinaro, Tim De Ryck, T obias Rohner, Francesca Bartolucci, Rima Alaifari, Siddhartha Mishra, and Emmanuel de Bézenac. Convolutional neural operators for robust and accurate learning of pdes, 2023

2023
[21]

Goldberg, Y an-Fei Jiang, and Lars Bildsten

Jared A. Goldberg, Y an-Fei Jiang, and Lars Bildsten. Numerical Simulations of Convective Three-dimensional Red Supergiant Envelopes.The Astrophysical Journal, 929(2):156, April 2022

2022
[22]

The sequence read archive: explosive growth of sequencing data.Nucleic acids research, 40(D1):D54–D56, 2012

Y uichi Kodama, Martin Shumway, and Rasko Leinonen. The sequence read archive: explosive growth of sequencing data.Nucleic acids research, 40(D1):D54–D56, 2012

2012
[23]

The data deluge: An e-science perspective

T ony Hey and Anne Trefethen. The data deluge: An e-science perspective. Grid computing: Making the global infrastructure a reality, pages 809–824, 2003

2003
[24]

Training deep surrogate models with large scale online learning

Lucas Thibaut Meyer, Marc Schouler, Robert Alexander Caulk, Alejandro Ribes, and Bruno Raffin. Training deep surrogate models with large scale online learning. InInternational Conference on Machine Learning, pages 24614–24630. PMLR, 2023

2023
[25]

Gpt-4 technical report

Josh Achiam, Steven Adler, Sandhini Agarwal, Lama Ahmad, Ilge Akkaya, Florencia Leoni Aleman, Diogo Almeida, Janko Altenschmidt, Sam Altman, Shyamal Anadkat, et al. Gpt-4 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774, 2023. 12

2023 arXiv
[26]

Llama 2: Open foundation and fine-tuned chat models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.09288, 2023

Hugo T ouvron, Louis Martin, Kevin Stone, Peter Albert, Amjad Almahairi, Y asmine Babaei, Nikolay Bashlykov, Soumya Batra, Prajjwal Bhargava, Shruti Bhosale, et al. Llama 2: Open foundation and fine-tuned chat models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.09288, 2023

2023 arXiv
[27]

The falcon series of open language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.16867, 2023

Ebtesam Almazrouei, Hamza Alobeidli, Abdulaziz Alshamsi, Alessandro Cappelli, Ruxandra Cojocaru, Mérouane Debbah, Étienne Goffinet, Daniel Hesslow, Julien Launay, Quentin Malartic, et al. The falcon series of open language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.16867, 2023

2023 arXiv
[28]

Scaling rectified flow transformers for high-resolution image synthesis.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.03206, 2024

Patrick Esser, Sumith Kulal, Andreas Blattmann, Rahim Entezari, Jonas Müller, Harry Saini, Y am Levi, Dominik Lorenz, Axel Sauer, Frederic Boesel, et al. Scaling rectified flow transformers for high-resolution image synthesis.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.03206, 2024

2024 arXiv
[29]

Asynchronous pipeline for processing huge corpora on medium to low resource infrastructures

Pedro Javier Ortiz Suárez, Benoît Sagot, and Laurent Romary. Asynchronous pipeline for processing huge corpora on medium to low resource infrastructures. In7th W orkshop on the Challenges in the Management of Large Corpora (CMLC-7). Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache, 2019

2019
[30]

Obelics: An open web-scale filtered dataset of interleaved image-text documents.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024

Hugo Laurençon, Lucile Saulnier, Léo Tronchon, Stas Bekman, Amanpreet Singh, Anton Lozhkov, Thomas W ang, Siddharth Karamcheti, Alexander Rush, Douwe Kiela, et al. Obelics: An open web-scale filtered dataset of interleaved image-text documents.Advances in Neural Information Pr...

2024
[31]

The pile: An 800gb dataset of diverse text for language modeling.arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.00027, 2020

Leo Gao, Stella Biderman, Sid Black, Laurence Golding, Travis Hoppe, Charles Foster, Jason Phang, Horace He, Anish Thite, Noa Nabeshima, et al. The pile: An 800gb dataset of diverse text for language modeling.arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.00027, 2020

2020 arXiv
[32]

The refinedweb dataset for falcon llm: outperforming curated corpora with web data, and web data only.arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.01116, 2023

Guilherme Penedo, Quentin Malartic, Daniel Hesslow, Ruxandra Cojocaru, Alessandro Cappelli, Hamza Alobeidli, Baptiste Pannier, Ebtesam Almazrouei, and Julien Launay. The refinedweb dataset for falcon llm: outperforming curated corpora with web data, and web data only.arXiv pre...

2023 arXiv
[33]

Laion-5b: An open large-scale dataset for training next generation image-text models.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:25278–25294, 2022

Christoph Schuhmann, Romain Beaumont, Richard V encu, Cade Gordon, Ross Wightman, Mehdi Cherti, Theo Coombes, Aarush Katta, Clayton Mullis, Mitchell W ortsman, et al. Laion-5b: An open large-scale dataset for training next generation image-text models.Advances in Neural Inform...

2022
[34]

Scaling language models: Methods, analysis & insights from training gopher.arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.11446, 2021

Jack W Rae, Sebastian Borgeaud, Trevor Cai, Katie Millican, Jordan Hoffmann, Francis Song, John Aslanides, Sarah Henderson, Roman Ring, Susannah Y oung, et al. Scaling language models: Methods, analysis & insights from training gopher.arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.11446, 2021

2021 arXiv
[35]

T extbooks are all you need ii: phi-1.5 technical report.arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.05463, 2023

Y uanzhi Li, Sébastien Bubeck, Ronen Eldan, Allie Del Giorno, Suriya Gunasekar, and Yin T at Lee. T extbooks are all you need ii: phi-1.5 technical report.arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.05463, 2023

2023 arXiv
[36]

Pdebench: An extensive benchmark for scientific machine learning

Makoto T akamoto, Timothy Praditia, Raphael Leiteritz, Daniel MacKinlay, Francesco Alesiani, Dirk Pflüger, and Mathias Niepert. Pdebench: An extensive benchmark for scientific machine learning. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:1596–1611, 2022

2022
[37]

T owards multi-spatiotemporal-scale generalized pde modeling

Jayesh K Gupta and Johannes Brandstetter. T owards multi-spatiotemporal-scale generalized pde modeling. arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.15616, 2022

2022 arXiv
[38]

Pinnacle: A comprehensive benchmark of physics-informed neural networks for solving pdes.arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.08827, 2023

Zhongkai Hao, Jiachen Y ao, Chang Su, Hang Su, Ziao W ang, Fanzhi Lu, Zeyu Xia, Yichi Zhang, Songming Liu, Lu Lu, et al. Pinnacle: A comprehensive benchmark of physics-informed neural networks for solving pdes.arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.08827, 2023

2023 arXiv
[39]

Benchmarking autoregressive conditional diffusion models for turbulent flow simulation.arXiv, 2023

Georg Kohl, Li-W ei Chen, and Nils Thuerey. Benchmarking autoregressive conditional diffusion models for turbulent flow simulation.arXiv, 2023

2023
[40]

Airfrans: High fidelity computational fluid dynamics dataset for approximating reynolds-averaged navier–stokes solutions

Florent Bonnet, Jocelyn Mazari, Paola Cinnella, and Patrick Gallinari. Airfrans: High fidelity computational fluid dynamics dataset for approximating reynolds-averaged navier–stokes solutions. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:23463–23478, 2022

2022
[41]

Lagrangebench: A lagrangian fluid mechanics benchmarking suite.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024

Artur T oshev, Gianluca Galletti, Fabian Fritz, Stefan Adami, and Nikolaus Adams. Lagrangebench: A lagrangian fluid mechanics benchmarking suite.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024. 13

2024
[42]

The era5 global reanalysis

Hans Hersbach, Bill Bell, Paul Berrisford, Shoji Hirahara, András Horányi, Joaquín Muñoz-Sabater, Julien Nicolas, Carole Peubey, Raluca Radu, Dinand Schepers, et al. The era5 global reanalysis. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 146(730):1999–2049, 2020

1999
[43]

David Neelin, David Randall, Sara Shamekh, Mark A T aylor, Nathan Urban, Janni Y uval, Guang Zhang, and Michael Pritchard

Sungduk Y u, W alter Hannah, Liran Peng, Jerry Lin, Mohamed Aziz Bhouri, Ritwik Gupta, Björn Lütjens, Justus Christopher Will, Gunnar Behrens, Julius Busecke, Nora Loose, Charles I Stern, T om Beucler, Bryce Harrop, Benjamin R Hillman, Andrea Jenney, Savannah Ferretti, Nana Li...

2024
[44]

Eagle: Large-scale learning of turbulent fluid dynamics with mesh transformers

Steeven Janny, Aurélien Benetteau, Madiha Nadri, Julie Digne, Nicolas Thome, and Christian W olf. Eagle: Large-scale learning of turbulent fluid dynamics with mesh transformers. InInternational Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2023

2023
[45]

BubbleML: A multi-physics dataset and benchmarks for machine learning

Sheikh Md Shakeel Hassan, Arthur Feeney, Akash Dhruv, Jihoon Kim, Y oungjoon Suh, Jaiyoung Ryu, Y oonjin W on, and Aparna Chandramowlishwaran. BubbleML: A multi-physics dataset and benchmarks for machine learning. InAdvances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2023

2023
[46]

Lips-learning industrial physical simulation benchmark suite

Milad LEYLI ABADI, Antoine Marot, Jérôme Picault, David Danan, Mouadh Y agoubi, Benjamin Donnot, Seif Attoui, Pavel Dimitrov, Asma Farjallah, and Clement Etienam. Lips-learning industrial physical simulation benchmark suite. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 3...

2022
[47]

Chen, Jack Guo, Davy Brouzet, Mohsen T alei, Bruno Savard, Alexei Y

W ai T ong Chung, Bassem Akoush, Pushan Sharma, Alex T amkin, Ki Sung Jung, Jacqueline H. Chen, Jack Guo, Davy Brouzet, Mohsen T alei, Bruno Savard, Alexei Y . Poludnenko, and Matthias Ihme. Turbulence in focus: Benchmarking scaling behavior of 3D volumetric super-resolution w...

2023
[48]

A public turbulence database cluster and applications to study lagrangian evolution of velocity increments in turbulence.Journal of Turbulence, (9):N31, 2008

Yi Li, Eric Perlman, Minping W an, Y unke Y ang, Charles Meneveau, Randal Burns, Shiyi Chen, Alexander Szalay, and Gregory Eyink. A public turbulence database cluster and applications to study lagrangian evolution of velocity increments in turbulence.Journal of Turbulence, (9)...

2008
[49]

Multiple physics pretraining for physical surrogate models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.02994, 2023

Michael McCabe, Bruno Régaldo-Saint Blancard, Liam Holden Parker, Ruben Ohana, Miles Cran- mer, Alberto Bietti, Michael Eickenberg, Siavash Golkar, Geraud Krawezik, Francois Lanusse, et al. Multiple physics pretraining for physical surrogate models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.02...

arXiv
[50]

Liu Y ang, Siting Liu, Tingwei Meng, and Stanley J. Osher. In-context operator learning with data prompts for differential equation problems.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 120(39), September 2023

2023
[51]

Pretraining codomain attention neural operators for solving multiphysics pdes.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.12553, 2024

Md Ashiqur Rahman, Robert Joseph George, Mogab Elleithy, Daniel Leibovici, Zongyi Li, Boris Bonev, Colin White, Julius Berner, Raymond A Y eh, Jean Kossaifi, et al. Pretraining codomain attention neural operators for solving multiphysics pdes.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.12553, 2024

2024 arXiv
[52]

T owards a foundation model for partial differential equation: Multi-operator learning and extrapolation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.12355, 2024

Jingmin Sun, Y uxuan Liu, Zecheng Zhang, and Hayden Schaeffer. T owards a foundation model for partial differential equation: Multi-operator learning and extrapolation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.12355, 2024

2024 arXiv
[53]

Ups: T owards foundation models for pde solving via cross-modal adaptation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.07187, 2024

Junhong Shen, T anya Marwah, and Ameet T alwalkar. Ups: T owards foundation models for pde solving via cross-modal adaptation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.07187, 2024

2024 arXiv
[54]

Poseidon: Efficient foundation models for pdes, 2024

Maximilian Herde, Bogdan Raoni´c, T obias Rohner, Roger Käppeli, Roberto Molinaro, Emmanuel de Bézenac, and Siddhartha Mishra. Poseidon: Efficient foundation models for pdes, 2024

2024
[55]

h5py/h5py: 3.8

Andrew Collette, Thomas Kluyver, Thomas A Caswell, James T ocknell, Jerome Kieffer, Aleksandar Jelenak, Anthony Scopatz, Darren Dale, Thomas VINCENT , Matt Einhorn, et al. h5py/h5py: 3.8. 0-aarch64-wheels.Zenodo, 2023. 14

2023
[56]

Pytorch: An imperative style, high-performance deep learning library, 2019

Adam Paszke, Sam Gross, Francisco Massa, Adam Lerer, James Bradbury, Gregory Chanan, Trevor Killeen, Zeming Lin, Natalia Gimelshein, Luca Antiga, Alban Desmaison, Andreas Köpf, Edward Y ang, Zach DeVito, Martin Raison, Alykhan T ejani, Sasank Chilamkurthy, Benoit Steiner, Lu F...

2019
[57]

Array programming with numpy.Nature, 585(7825):357–362, 2020

Charles R Harris, K Jarrod Millman, Stéfan J V an Der W alt, Ralf Gommers, Pauli Virtanen, David Cournapeau, Eric Wieser, Julian T aylor, Sebastian Berg, Nathaniel J Smith, et al. Array programming with numpy.Nature, 585(7825):357–362, 2020

2020
[58]

Goldberg, Y an-Fei Jiang, and Lars Bildsten

Jared A. Goldberg, Y an-Fei Jiang, and Lars Bildsten. Shock Breakout in Three-dimensional Red Supergiant Envelopes.The Astrophysical Journal, 933(2):164, July 2022

2022
[59]

Böhm-Vitense

E. Böhm-Vitense. Über die W asserstoffkonvektionszone in Sternen verschiedener Effektivtemper- aturen und Leuchtkräfte. Mit 5 T extabbildungen.Zeitschrift für Astrophysik, 46:108, January 1958

1958
[60]

J. P . Cox and R. T . Giuli.Principles of stellar structure. 1968

1968
[61]

A Review of the Mixing Length Theory of Convection in 1D Stellar Modeling

Meridith Joyce and Jamie T ayar. A Review of the Mixing Length Theory of Convection in 1D Stellar Modeling. Galaxies, 11(3):75, June 2023

2023
[62]

Chiavassa, R

A. Chiavassa, R. Norris, M. Montargès, R. Ligi, L. Fossati, L. Bigot, F . Baron, P . Kervella, J. D. Monnier, D. Mourard, N. Nardetto, G. Perrin, G. H. Schaefer, T . A. ten Brummelaar, Z. Magic, R. Collet, and M. Asplund. Asymmetries on red giant branch surfaces from CHARA/MIR...

2017
[63]

Chiavassa, B

A. Chiavassa, B. Freytag, and M. Schultheis. Heading Gaia to measure atmospheric dynamics in AGB stars. Astronomy & Astrophysics, 617:L1, September 2018

2018
[64]

Chiavassa, K

A. Chiavassa, K. Kravchenko, F . Millour, G. Schaefer, M. Schultheis, B. Freytag, O. Creevey, V . Hocdé, F . Morand, R. Ligi, S. Kraus, J. D. Monnier, D. Mourard, N. Nardetto, N. Anugu, J. B. Le Bouquin, C. L. Davies, J. Ennis, T . Gardner, A. Labdon, C. Lanthermann, B. R. Set...

2020
[65]

Goldberg

Andrea Chiavassa, Kateryna Kravchenko, and Jared A. Goldberg. Signatures of convection in the atmospheres of cool evolved stars.Living Reviews in Computational Astrophysics, 10(1):2, March 2024

2024
[66]

Lax and Xu-Dong Liu

Peter D. Lax and Xu-Dong Liu. Solution of two-dimensional riemann problems of gas dynamics by positive schemes.SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 19(2):319–340, 1998

1998
[67]

Alan M. Turing. The chemical basis of morphogenesis.Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 237(641):37–72, 1952

1952
[68]

Gray and S

P . Gray and S. K. Scott. Autocatalytic reactions in the isothermal, continuous stirred tank reactor: Oscillations and instabilities in the systemA+2B →3B; B →C. Chemical Engineering Science, 39(6):1087–1097, 1984

1984
[69]

Williamson, John B

David L. Williamson, John B. Drake, James J. Hack, Rüdiger Jakob, and Paul N. Swarztrauber. A standard test set for numerical approximations to the shallow water equations in spherical geometry. Journal of Computational Physics, 102(1):211–224, 1992

1992
[70]

Lattimer and D.N

J.M. Lattimer and D.N. Schramm. Black-Hole-Neutron-Star Collisions.Astrophysical Journal Letters, 192:L145, 1974

1974
[71]

J. M. Lattimer and D. N. Schramm. The tidal disruption of neutron stars by black holes in close binaries. The Astrophysical Journal, 210:549–567, December 1976

1976
[72]

Transient Events from Neutron Star Mergers

Li-Xin Li and Bohdan Paczy´nski. Transient Events from Neutron Star Mergers. Astrophysical Journal Letters, 507(1):L59–L62, 1998

1998
[73]

B. P . Abbott et al. GW170817: Observation of Gravitational W aves from a Binary Neutron Star Inspiral. Physical Review Letters, 119(16):30–33, 2017. 15

2017
[74]

B. P . Abbott et al. Multi-messenger Observations of a Binary Neutron Star Merger.Astrophysical Journal Letters, 848:L12, 2017

2017
[75]

K. D. Alexander et al. The electromagnetic counterpart of the binary neutron star merger ligo/virgo gw170817. vi. radio constraints on a relativistic jet and predictions for late-time emission from the kilonova ejecta.The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 848(2):L21, oct 2017

2017
[76]

P . S. Cowperthwaite et al. The electromagnetic counterpart of the binary neutron star merger LIGO/VIRGO GW170817. II. UV , optical, and near-ir light curves and comparison to kilonova models. Astrophysical Journal Letters, 848:L17, 2017

2017
[77]

V . A. Villar et al. The combined ultraviolet, optical, and near-infrared light curves of the kilonova associated with the binary neutron star merger gw170817: unified data set, analytic models, and physical implications.Astrophysical Journal Letters, 851(1):L21, 2017

2017
[78]

Lord Rayleigh. Lix. on convection currents in a horizontal layer of fluid, when the higher temperature is on the under side. The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science, 32(192):529–546, 1916

1916
[79]

Steady rayleigh–bénard convection between no-slip boundaries.Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 933:R4, 2022

Baole W en, David Goluskin, and Charles R Doering. Steady rayleigh–bénard convection between no-slip boundaries.Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 933:R4, 2022

2022
[80]

Cambridge University Press, 2001

Gerald Schubert, Donald Lawson Turcotte, and Peter Olson.Mantle convection in the Earth and planets. Cambridge University Press, 2001

2001
[81]

Elsevier, 2001

Gerold Siedler, John Gould, and John A Church.Ocean circulation and climate: observing and modelling the global ocean. Elsevier, 2001

2001
[82]

An introduction to dynamic meteorology, volume 88

James R Holton and Gregory J Hakim. An introduction to dynamic meteorology, volume 88. Academic press, 2013

2013
[83]

Cooling of electronic systems, volume 258

Sadik Kakaç, Hafit Yüncü, and Kunio Hijikata. Cooling of electronic systems, volume 258. Springer Science & Business Media, 2012

2012
[84]

Transport phenomena in materials processing

David R Poirier and G Geiger. Transport phenomena in materials processing. Springer, 2016

2016
[85]

Stellar interiors: physical principles, structure, and evolution

Carl J Hansen, Steven D Kawaler, and Virginia Trimble. Stellar interiors: physical principles, structure, and evolution. Springer Science & Business Media, 2012

2012
[86]

The instability of liquid surfaces when accelerated in a direction perpendicular to their planes

Geoffrey Ingram T aylor. The instability of liquid surfaces when accelerated in a direction perpendicular to their planes. i.Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and physical sciences, 201(1065):192–196, 1950

1950
[87]

Academic press, 2015

Pijush K Kundu, Ira M Cohen, and David R Dowling.Fluid mechanics. Academic press, 2015

2015
[88]

Space-time energy spectra in turbulent shear flows.Physical Review Fluids, 6(10):100504, 2021

Ting Wu and Guowei He. Space-time energy spectra in turbulent shear flows.Physical Review Fluids, 6(10):100504, 2021

2021
[89]

Self-organization of autophoretic suspensions in confined shear flows

Prathmesh Vinze and Sebastien Michelin. Self-organization of autophoretic suspensions in confined shear flows. Physical Review Fluids, 9(1):014202, 2024

2024
[90]

Separated and vortical flow in aircraft aerodynamics: a cfd perspective

Arthur Rizzi. Separated and vortical flow in aircraft aerodynamics: a cfd perspective. The Aeronautical Journal, 127(1313):1065–1103, 2023

2023
[91]

Ocean mixing by kelvin-helmholtz instability

William D Smyth and James N Moum. Ocean mixing by kelvin-helmholtz instability. Oceanography, 25(2):140–149, 2012

2012
[92]

Assessment of turbulent blood flow and wall shear stress in aortic coarctation using image-based simulations.Biomedical engineering online, 20(1):84, 2021

Romana Perinajová, Joe F Juffermans, Jonhatan Lorenzo Mercado, Jean-Paul Aben, Leon Ledoux, Jos JM W estenberg, Hildo J Lamb, and Saša Kenjereš. Assessment of turbulent blood flow and wall shear stress in aortic coarctation using image-based simulations.Biomedical engineering ...

2021
[93]

Max Gronke and S. Peng Oh. The growth and entrainment of cold gas in a hot wind. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters, 480(1):L111–L115, October 2018. 16

2018
[94]

Abruzzo, Drummond B

Matthew W . Abruzzo, Drummond B. Fielding, and Greg L. Bryan. T aming the TuRMoiL: The Temperature Dependence of Turbulence in Cloud–Wind Interactions.The Astrophysical Journal, 966(2):181, May 2024

2024
[95]

Fielding, Eve C

Drummond B. Fielding, Eve C. Ostriker, Greg L. Bryan, and Adam S. Jermyn. Multiphase Gas and the Fractal Nature of Radiative Turbulent Mixing Layers.The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 894(2):L24, May 2020

2020
[96]

Multistability of elasto-inertial two-dimensional channel flow.Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 981:A30, 2024

Miguel Beneitez, Jacob Page, Yves Dubief, and Rich R Kerswell. Multistability of elasto-inertial two-dimensional channel flow.Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 981:A30, 2024

2024
[97]

Fourier neural operator for parametric partial differential equations

Zongyi Li, Nikola Kovachki, Kamyar Azizzadenesheli, Burigede Liu, Kaushik Bhattacharya, Andrew Stuart, and Anima Anandkumar. Fourier neural operator for parametric partial differential equations. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.08895, 2020

2010 arXiv
[98]

Multi-grid tensorized fourier neural operator for high resolution PDEs, 2023

Jean Kossaifi, Nikola Borislavov Kovachki, Kamyar Azizzadenesheli, and Anima Anandkumar. Multi-grid tensorized fourier neural operator for high resolution PDEs, 2023

2023
[99]

U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation

Olaf Ronneberger, Philipp Fischer, and Thomas Brox. U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation. InMedical image computing and computer-assisted intervention–MICCAI 2015: 18th international conference, Munich, Germany, October 5-9, 2015, proceedings, part I...

2015
[100]

A convnet for the 2020s, 2022

Zhuang Liu, Hanzi Mao, Chao-Y uan Wu, Christoph Feichtenhofer, Trevor Darrell, and Saining Xie. A convnet for the 2020s, 2022

2022
[101]

Neural operator: Learning maps between function spaces with applications to pdes.Journal of Machine Learning Research, 24(89):1–97, 2023

Nikola Kovachki, Zongyi Li, Burigede Liu, Kamyar Azizzadenesheli, Kaushik Bhattacharya, Andrew Stuart, and Anima Anandkumar. Neural operator: Learning maps between function spaces with applications to pdes.Journal of Machine Learning Research, 24(89):1–97, 2023

2023
[102]

Guiding continuous operator learning through physics-based boundary constraints

Nadim Saad, Gaurav Gupta, Shima Alizadeh, and Danielle Maddix Robinson. Guiding continuous operator learning through physics-based boundary constraints. InICLR 2023, 2023

2023
[103]

Sukumar and Ankit Srivastava

N. Sukumar and Ankit Srivastava. Exact imposition of boundary conditions with distance functions in physics-informed deep neural networks.Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 389:114333, February 2022

2022
[104]

Jacob, and Stéphane Moreau

Antonio Alguacil, W agner Gonçalves Pinto, Michael Bauerheim, Marc C. Jacob, and Stéphane Moreau. Effects of boundary conditions in fully convolutional networks for learning spatio-temporal dynamics, 2021

2021
[105]

Learning physical models that can respect conservation laws

Derek Hansen, Danielle Maddix Robinson, Shima Alizadeh, Gaurav Gupta, and Michael Mahoney. Learning physical models that can respect conservation laws. InICML 2023, 2023

2023
[106]

Invariant preservation in machine learned pde solvers via error correction, 2023

Nick McGreivy and Ammar Hakim. Invariant preservation in machine learned pde solvers via error correction, 2023

2023
[107]

Learned simulators for turbulence

Kim Stachenfeld, Drummond Buschman Fielding, Dmitrii Kochkov, Miles Cranmer, T obias Pfaff, Jonathan Godwin, Can Cui, Shirley Ho, Peter Battaglia, and Alvaro Sanchez-Gonzalez. Learned simulators for turbulence. InInternational Conference on Learning Representations, 2022

2022
[108]

V eeling, Paris Perdikaris, Richard E

Phillip Lippe, Bastiaan S. V eeling, Paris Perdikaris, Richard E. Turner, and Johannes Brandstetter. Pde-refiner: Achieving accurate long rollouts with neural pde solvers, 2023

2023
[109]

Croissant: A metadata format for ml-ready datasets

Mubashara Akhtar, Omar Benjelloun, Costanza Conforti, Pieter Gijsbers, Joan Giner-Miguelez, Nitisha Jain, Michael Kuchnik, Quentin Lhoest, Pierre Marcenac, Manil Maskey, Peter Mattson, Luis Oala, Pierre Ruyssen, Rajat Shinde, Elena Simperl, Goeffry Thomas, Slava T ykhonov, Joa...

2024
[110]

Clawpack software

Clawpack Development T eam. Clawpack software. http://www.clawpack.org, 2021. 17

2021
[111]

Stone, Kengo T omida, Christopher J

James M. Stone, Kengo T omida, Christopher J. White, and Kyle G. Felker. The Athena++ Adaptive Mesh Refinement Framework: Design and Magnetohydrodynamic Solvers.The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 249(1):4, July 2020

2020
[112]

Dedalus: A flexible framework for numerical simulations with spectral methods.Physical Review Research, 2(2):023068, 2020

Keaton J Burns, Geoffrey M V asil, Jeffrey S Oishi, Daniel Lecoanet, and Benjamin P Brown. Dedalus: A flexible framework for numerical simulations with spectral methods.Physical Review Research, 2(2):023068, 2020

2020
[113]

Miller, Ben

Jonah M. Miller, Ben. R. Ryan, and Joshua C. Dolence. νbhlight: Radiation grmhd for neutrino-driven accretion flows.The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 241(2):30, apr 2019

2019
[114]

Theses, École normale supérieure de Cachan - ENS Cachan, September 2011

Romain W atteaux.Détection des grandes structures turbulentes dans les couches de mélange de type Rayleigh-T aylor en vue de la validation de modèles statistiques turbulents bi-structure. Theses, École normale supérieure de Cachan - ENS Cachan, September 2011

2011
[115]

Implementation and performance of FDPS: a framework for developing parallel particle simulation codes.Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan, 68(4):54, August 2016

Masaki Iwasawa, Ataru T anikawa, Natsuki Hosono, Keigo Nitadori, T akayuki Muranushi, and Junichiro Makino. Implementation and performance of FDPS: a framework for developing parallel particle simulation codes.Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan, 68(4):54, August 2016

2016
[116]

Instabilities and nonlinear dynamics of concentrated active suspensions.Physics of Fluids, 25(7), 2013

Barath Ezhilan, Michael J Shelley, and David Saintillan. Instabilities and nonlinear dynamics of concentrated active suspensions.Physics of Fluids, 25(7), 2013

2013
[117]

Analytical structure, dynamics, and coarse graining of a kinetic model of an active fluid

T ong Gao, Meredith D Betterton, An-Sheng Jhang, and Michael J Shelley. Analytical structure, dynamics, and coarse graining of a kinetic model of an active fluid. Physical Review Fluids, 2(9):093302, 2017

2017
[118]

Theory of active suspensions.Complex Fluids in Biological Systems: Experiment, Theory, and Computation, pages 319–355, 2015

David Saintillan and Michael J Shelley. Theory of active suspensions.Complex Fluids in Biological Systems: Experiment, Theory, and Computation, pages 319–355, 2015

2015
[119]

Thermodynamically consistent coarse-graining of polar active fluids.Physical Review Fluids, 7(6):063301, 2022

Scott W eady, David B Stein, and Michael J Shelley. Thermodynamically consistent coarse-graining of polar active fluids.Physical Review Fluids, 7(6):063301, 2022

2022
[120]

Learning fast, accurate, and stable closures of a kinetic theory of an active fluid.Journal of Computational Physics, page 112869, 2024

Suryanarayana Maddu, Scott W eady, and Michael J Shelley. Learning fast, accurate, and stable closures of a kinetic theory of an active fluid.Journal of Computational Physics, page 112869, 2024

2024
[121]

Y an-Fei Jiang. An Implicit Finite V olume Scheme to Solve the Time-dependent Radiation Transport Equation Based on Discrete Ordinates.The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 253(2):49, April 2021

2021
[122]

Iglesias and Forrest J

Carlos A. Iglesias and Forrest J. Rogers. Updated Opal Opacities. The Astrophysical Journal, 464:943, June 1996

1996
[123]

Local Radiation Hydrodynamic Simulations of Massive Star Envelopes at the Iron Opacity Peak.The Astrophysical Journal, 813(1):74, November 2015

Y an-Fei Jiang, Matteo Cantiello, Lars Bildsten, Eliot Quataert, and Omer Blaes. Local Radiation Hydrodynamic Simulations of Massive Star Envelopes at the Iron Opacity Peak.The Astrophysical Journal, 813(1):74, November 2015

2015
[124]

Outbursts of luminous blue variable stars from variations in the helium opacity

Y an-Fei Jiang, Matteo Cantiello, Lars Bildsten, Eliot Quataert, Omer Blaes, and James Stone. Outbursts of luminous blue variable stars from variations in the helium opacity. Nature, 561(7724):498–501, September 2018

2018
[125]

Ahmadia, M.J

K.T .Mandli, A.J. Ahmadia, M.J. Berger, D.A. Calhoun, D.L. George, Y . Hadjimichael, D.I. Ketcheson, G.I Lemoine, and R.J. LeV eque. Clawpack: building an open source ecosystem for solving hyperbolic PDEs.P eerJ Computer Science 2:e68, 2016. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.68

2016 doi
[126]

Robert P . Munafo. Reaction-diffusion by the Gray-Scott model: Pearson’s parametrization. https://www.mrob.com/pub/comp/xmorphia/
[127]

W alker, A.K

B.J. W alker, A.K. T ownsend, A.K. Chudasama, and A. L. Krause. VisualPDE: Rapid interactive simulations of partial differential equations, 2023

2023
[128]

A Driscoll, N

T . A Driscoll, N. Hale, and L. N. Trefethen.Chebfun Guide. Pafnuty Publications, 2014

2014
[129]

Trefethen

Aly-Khan Kassam and Lloyd N. Trefethen. Fourth-Order Time-Stepping for Stiff PDEs.SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 26(4):1214–1233, 2005. 18

2005
[130]

Trapped acoustic waves and raindrops: high-order accurate integral equation method for localized excitation of a periodic staircase.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.12486, 2023

Fruzsina J Agocs and Alex H Barnett. Trapped acoustic waves and raindrops: high-order accurate integral equation method for localized excitation of a periodic staircase.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.12486, 2023

2023 arXiv
[131]

A convergent numerical scheme for scattering of aperiodic waves from periodic surfaces based on the Floquet–Bloch transform

Armin Lechleiter and Ruming Zhang. A convergent numerical scheme for scattering of aperiodic waves from periodic surfaces based on the Floquet–Bloch transform. SIAM J. Numer . Anal., 55(2):713–736, 2017

2017
[132]

A high order numerical method for scattering from locally perturbed periodic surfaces

Ruming Zhang. A high order numerical method for scattering from locally perturbed periodic surfaces. SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 40(4):A2286–A2314, 2018

2018
[133]

The method of fundamental solutions for elliptic boundary value problems.Advances in Computational Mathematics, 9:69–95, 1998

Graeme Fairweather and Andreas Karageorghis. The method of fundamental solutions for elliptic boundary value problems.Advances in Computational Mathematics, 9:69–95, 1998

1998
[134]

An overview of the method of fundamental solutions—solvability, uniqueness, convergence, and stability.Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements, 120:118–152, 2020

Alexander HD Cheng and Y ongxing Hong. An overview of the method of fundamental solutions—solvability, uniqueness, convergence, and stability.Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements, 120:118–152, 2020

2020
[135]

Stability and convergence of the method of fundamental solutions for helmholtz problems on analytic domains

Alex H Barnett and Timo Betcke. Stability and convergence of the method of fundamental solutions for helmholtz problems on analytic domains. Journal of Computational Physics, 227(14):7003–7026, 2008

2008
[136]

Numerical comparison of two meshfree methods for acoustic wave scattering.Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements, 29(4):371–382, 2005

Carlos JS Alves and Svilen S V altchev. Numerical comparison of two meshfree methods for acoustic wave scattering.Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements, 29(4):371–382, 2005

2005
[137]

The Rayleigh hypothesis and a related least-squares solution to scattering problems for periodic surfaces and other scatterers.Radio Science, 8(8-9):785–796, 1973

RF Millar. The Rayleigh hypothesis and a related least-squares solution to scattering problems for periodic surfaces and other scatterers.Radio Science, 8(8-9):785–796, 1973

1973
[138]

On the use of the Kirchhoff approximation for the solution of reflection problems

William C Meecham. On the use of the Kirchhoff approximation for the solution of reflection problems. Journal of Rational Mechanics and Analysis, 5(2):323–334, 1956

1956
[139]

A geometrical theory of diffraction

J B Keller. A geometrical theory of diffraction. In L M Graves, editor,Calculus of V ariations and its Applications, number 8 in Proceedings of Symposia in Applied Mathematics, pages 27–52, New Y ork, 1958. McGraw-Hill

1958
[140]

Geometrical theory of diffraction.Josa, 52(2):116–130, 1962

Joseph B Keller. Geometrical theory of diffraction.Josa, 52(2):116–130, 1962

1962
[141]

Edward L Richards, HC Song, and WS Hodgkiss. Acoustic scattering comparison of Kirchhoff approximation to Rayleigh-fourier method for sinusoidal surface waves at low grazing angles.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 144(3):1269–1278, 2018

2018
[142]

Lazarian

Jungyeon Cho and A. Lazarian. Compressible Magnetohydrodynamic Turbulence: mode coupling, scaling relations, anisotropy, new regime and astrophysical implications.MNRAS, 345:325–339, jan 2003

2003
[143]

Kowal, A

G. Kowal, A. Lazarian, and A. Beresnyak. Density fluctuations in mhd turbulence: Spectral properties and intermittency.The Astrophysical Journal, 658:423–445, 2007

2007
[144]

BICEP2 I: Detection Of B-mode Polarization at Degree Angular Scales

BICEP2 Collaboration. BICEP2 I: Detection Of B-mode Polarization at Degree Angular Scales. The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 785:L1, April 2014

2014
[145]

Lazarian, and B

Blakesley Burkhart, A. Lazarian, and B. M. Gaensler. Properties of interstellar turbulence in the galactic halo from structure function analysis of rotation measure maps.The Astrophysical Journal, 785(1):123, 2014

2014
[146]

S. K. N. Portillo and D. P . Finkbeiner. Applying the W asserstein Distance to Astronomical Catalogs. The Astrophysical Journal, 862:119, August 2018

2018
[147]

Hill, Robert A

Alex S. Hill, Robert A. Benjamin, Grzegorz Kowal, Ronald J. Reynolds, L. Matthew Haffner, and Alex Lazarian. The turbulent warm ionized medium: Emission measure distribution and mhd simulations. The Astrophysical Journal, 686:363–378, 2008

2008
[148]

McKee and Eve C

Christopher F . McKee and Eve C. Ostriker. Theory of star formation.Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 45:565–687, 2007. 19

2007
[149]

Lazarian

Blakesley Burkhart, Diego Falceta-Goncalves, Grzegorz Kowal, and A. Lazarian. Density studies of mhd interstellar turbulence: Statistical moments, correlations and bispectrum.The Astrophysical Journal, 693:250–266, 2009

2009
[150]

Burkhart, S

B. Burkhart, S. M. Appel, S. Bialy, J. Cho, A. J. Christensen, D. Collins, C. Federrath, D. B. Fielding, D. Finkbeiner, A. S. Hill, J. C. Ibáñez-Mejía, M. R. Krumholz, A. Lazarian, M. Li, P . Mocz, M. M. Mac Low, J. Naiman, S. K. N. Portillo, B. Shane, Z. Slepian, and Y . Y ua...

2020
[151]

Ascher, Steven J

Uri M. Ascher, Steven J. Ruuth, and Raymond J. Spiteri. Implicit-explicit runge-kutta methods for time-dependent partial differential equations.Applied Numerical Mathematics, 25(2):151–167,
[152]

T owards stability of autoregressive neural operators.Transactions on Machine Learning Research, 2023

Michael McCabe, Peter Harrington, Shashank Subramanian, and Jed Brown. T owards stability of autoregressive neural operators.Transactions on Machine Learning Research, 2023

2023
[153]

Miller, Benjamin R

Jonah M. Miller, Benjamin R. Ryan, Joshua C. Dolence, Adam Burrows, Christopher J. Fontes, Christopher L. Fryer, Oleg Korobkin, Jonas Lippuner, Matthew R. Mumpower, and Ryan T . W ollaeger. Full transport model of GW170817-like disk produces a blue kilonova.Physical Review D, ...

2019
[154]

Full transport general relativistic radiation mag- netohydrodynamics for nucleosynthesis in collapsars.The Astrophysical Journal, 902(1):66, 2020

Jonah M Miller, Trevor M Sprouse, Christopher L Fryer, Benjamin R Ryan, Joshua C Dolence, Matthew R Mumpower, and Rebecca Surman. Full transport general relativistic radiation mag- netohydrodynamics for nucleosynthesis in collapsars.The Astrophysical Journal, 902(1):66, 2020

2020
[155]

Nucleosynthesis in outflows from black hole–neutron star merger disks with full gr (ν) rmhd

Sanjana Curtis, Jonah M Miller, Carla Fröhlich, Trevor Sprouse, Nicole Lloyd-Ronning, and Matthew Mumpower. Nucleosynthesis in outflows from black hole–neutron star merger disks with full gr (ν) rmhd. The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 945(1):L13, 2023

2023
[156]

Magnetic field strength effects on nucleosynthesis from neutron star merger outflows.The Astrophysical Journal, 964(2):111, 2024

Kelsey A Lund, Gail C McLaughlin, Jonah M Miller, and Matthew R Mumpower. Magnetic field strength effects on nucleosynthesis from neutron star merger outflows.The Astrophysical Journal, 964(2):111, 2024

2024
[157]

V elikhov

E.P . V elikhov. Stability of an ideally conducting liquid flowing between rotating cylinders in a magnetic field. Zhur . Eksptl’. i T eoret. Fiz., 36(5), 5 1959

1959
[158]

S. A. Balbus and J. F . Hawley. A powerful local shear instability in weakly magnetized disks. I - Linear analysis. II - Nonlinear evolution.The Astrophysical Journal, 376:214–233, July 1991

1991
[159]

N. I. Shakura and R. A. Sunyaev. Black holes in binary systems. Observational appearance. Proceedings of the American Astronomical Society, 24:337–355, January 1973

1973
[160]

Gammie, Jonathan C

Charles F . Gammie, Jonathan C. McKinney, and Gabor T oth. Harm: A numerical scheme for general relativistic magnetohydrodynamics.The Astrophysical Journal, 589(1):444–457, May 2003

2003
[161]

Dolence, Charles F

Joshua C. Dolence, Charles F . Gammie, Monika Mo´s cibrodzka, and Po Kin Leung. grmonty: A MONTE CARLO CODE FOR RELA TIVISTIC RADIA TIVE TRANSPORT .The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 184(2):387–397, oct 2009

2009
[162]

B. R. Ryan, J. C. Dolence, and C. F . Gammie. bhlight: General relativistic radiation magnetohy- drodynamics with monte carlo transport.The Astrophysical Journal, 807(1):31, jun 2015

2015
[163]

The event horizon general relativistic magnetohydrodynamic code comparison project

Oliver Porth et al. The event horizon general relativistic magnetohydrodynamic code comparison project. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 243(2):26, aug 2019

2019
[164]

McKinney and Charles F

Jonathan C. McKinney and Charles F . Gammie. A Measurement of the Electromagnetic Luminosity of a Kerr Black Hole. The Astrophysical Journal, 611(2):977–995, August 2004

2004
[165]

McKinney, and Ramesh Narayan

Alexander Tchekhovskoy, Jonathan C. McKinney, and Ramesh Narayan. WHAM: a WENO-based general relativistic numerical scheme - I. Hydrodynamics. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 379(2):469–497, August 2007

2007
[166]

Mignone and Jonathan C

A. Mignone and Jonathan C. McKinney. Equation of state in relativistic magnetohydrodynamics: variable versus constant adiabatic index. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 378(3):1118–1130, July 2007. 20

2007
[167]

S. M. Ressler, A. Tchekhovskoy, E. Quataert, M. Chandra, and C. F . Gammie. Electron thermodynamics in GRMHD simulations of low-luminosity black hole accretion.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 454(2):1848–1870, 10 2015

2015
[168]

Roy P . Kerr. Gravitational Field of a Spinning Mass as an Example of Algebraically Special Metrics. Physical Review Letters, 11(5):237–238, September 1963

1963
[169]

L. G. Fishbone and V . Moncrief. Relativistic fluid disks in orbit around Kerr black holes.The Astrophysical Journal, 207:962–976, August 1976

1976
[170]

A. W . Steiner, M. Hempel, and T . Fischer. Core-collapse supernova equations of state based on neutron star observations.Astrophysical Journal, 774(1), 2013

2013
[171]

Aaron Skinner, Joshua C

M. Aaron Skinner, Joshua C. Dolence, Adam Burrows, David Radice, and David V artanyan. Fornax: A flexible code for multiphysics astrophysical simulations.The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 241(1):7, feb 2019

2019
[172]

Burrows, S

A. Burrows, S. Reddy, and T . A. Thompson. Neutrino opacities in nuclear matter.Nuclear Physics A, 777:356–394, October 2006

2006
[173]

A new open-source code for spherically symmetric stellar collapse to neutron stars and black holes.Classical and Quantum Gravity, 27(11):114103, 2010

Evan O’Connor and Christian D Ott. A new open-source code for spherically symmetric stellar collapse to neutron stars and black holes.Classical and Quantum Gravity, 27(11):114103, 2010

2010
[174]

Reynolds-number scaling and convergence time scale in two-dimensional rayleigh–bénard convection.Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 973:A9, 2023

Erik Lindborg. Reynolds-number scaling and convergence time scale in two-dimensional rayleigh–bénard convection.Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 973:A9, 2023

2023
[175]

L Y oungs, A Dimits, S W eber, M Marinak, S Wunsch, C Garasi, A Robinson, M

Guy Dimonte, D. L Y oungs, A Dimits, S W eber, M Marinak, S Wunsch, C Garasi, A Robinson, M. J Andrews, P Ramaprabhu, A. C Calder, B Fryxell, J Biello, L Dursi, P MacNeice, K Olson, P Ricker, R Rosner, F Timmes, H Tufo, Y .-N Y oung, and M Zingale. A comparative study of the t...

1994
[176]

Ramaprabhu, Guy Dimonte, P

P . Ramaprabhu, Guy Dimonte, P . W oodward, C. Fryer, G. Rockefeller, K. Muthuraman, P .-H. Lin, and J. Jayaraj. The late-time dynamics of the single-mode Rayleigh-T aylor instability.Physics of Fluids, 24(7):074107, 07 2012

2012
[177]

Small Atwood number Rayleigh-T aylor experiments

Malcolm J Andrews and Stuart B Dalziel. Small Atwood number Rayleigh-T aylor experiments. Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences, 368(1916):1663–1679, 2010

1916
[178]

Peyret and T .D

R. Peyret and T .D. T aylor. Computational methods for fluid flow.The International journal of heat and fluid flow, 4(3):182–182, 1983

1983
[179]

On a class of high resolution total-variation-stable finite-difference schemes.SIAM journal on numerical analysis, 21(1):1–23, 1984

A Harten. On a class of high resolution total-variation-stable finite-difference schemes.SIAM journal on numerical analysis, 21(1):1–23, 1984

1984
[180]

Uniformly high order accurate essentially non-oscillatory schemes .3

A Harten, B Engquist, S Osher, and Chakravarthy. Uniformly high order accurate essentially non-oscillatory schemes .3. (reprinted from journal of computational physics, vol 71, pg 231, 1987). Journal of computational physics, 131(1):3–47, 1997

1987
[181]

Gottlieb, C.-W

S. Gottlieb, C.-W . Shu, and E. T admor. Strong stability-preserving high-order time discretization methods. SIAM review, 43(1):89–112, 2001

2001
[182]

Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, Pa, 2nd ed

William L Briggs, V an Emden Henson, and Steve F McCormick.A multigrid tutorial, second edition. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, Pa, 2nd ed. edition, 2000

2000
[183]

Press and Saul A

William H. Press and Saul A. Teukolsky. Multigrid methods for boundary value problems. i. Computers in physics, 5(5):514, 1991

1991
[184]

Press and Saul A

William H. Press and Saul A. Teukolsky. Multigrid methods for boundary value problems. ii. Computers in physics, 5(6):626, 1991

1991
[185]

S.B. Pope. Turbulent flows, cambridge university press, cambridge, u.k., 2000, 771 pp.Combustion and flame, 125(4):1361–1362, 2000. 21

2000
[186]

Inertial-range anisotropy in Rayleigh-T aylor turbulence

Olivier Soulard and Jérôme Griffond. Inertial-range anisotropy in Rayleigh-T aylor turbulence. Physics of fluids (1994), 24(2):025101–025101–25, 2012

1994
[187]

Reynolds number effects on Rayleigh–T aylor instability with possible implications for type Ia supernovae.Nature Physics, 2:562–568, 07 2006

William Cabot and Andrew Cook. Reynolds number effects on Rayleigh–T aylor instability with possible implications for type Ia supernovae.Nature Physics, 2:562–568, 07 2006

2006
[188]

Phenomenology of Rayleigh-T aylor Turbulence

Michael Chertkov. Phenomenology of Rayleigh-T aylor Turbulence. Physical review letters, 91(11):1150011–1150014, 2003

2003
[189]

On the kelvin–helmholtz instability with smooth initial conditions–linear theory and simulations

Thomas Berlok and Christoph Pfrommer. On the kelvin–helmholtz instability with smooth initial conditions–linear theory and simulations. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 485(1):908–923, 2019

2019
[190]

L. I. Sedov. Similarity and Dimensional Methods in Mechanics. 1959

1959
[191]

Saitoh, Hiroshi Daisaka, Eiichiro Kokubo, Junichiro Makino, T akashi Okamoto, Kohji T omisaka, Keiichi W ada, and Naoki Y oshida

T akayuki R. Saitoh, Hiroshi Daisaka, Eiichiro Kokubo, Junichiro Makino, T akashi Okamoto, Kohji T omisaka, Keiichi W ada, and Naoki Y oshida. T oward First-Principle Simulations of Galaxy Formation: I. How Should W e Choose Star-Formation Criteria in High-Resolution Simulatio...

2008
[192]

Fujii, Y utaka Hirai, T akayuki R

Keiya Hirashima, Kana Moriwaki, Michiko S. Fujii, Y utaka Hirai, T akayuki R. Saitoh, and Junichiro Makino. 3D-Spatiotemporal forecasting the expansion of supernova shells using deep learning towards high-resolution galaxy simulations.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical ...

2023
[193]

Saitoh and Junichiro Makino

T akayuki R. Saitoh and Junichiro Makino. A Density-independent Formulation of Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics.The Astrophysical Journal, 768(1):44, May 2013

2013
[194]

Saitoh and Junichiro Makino

T akayuki R. Saitoh and Junichiro Makino. A Necessary Condition for Individual Time Steps in SPH Simulations. The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 697(2):L99–L102, June 2009

2009
[195]

Fujii, Y utaka Hirai, T akayuki R

Keiya Hirashima, Kana Moriwaki, Michiko S. Fujii, Y utaka Hirai, T akayuki R. Saitoh, Junichiro Makino, and Shirley Ho. Surrogate Modeling for Computationally Expensive Simulations of Supernovae in High-Resolution Galaxy Simulations. arXiv e-prints, page arXiv:2311.08460, Nove...

2023 arXiv
[196]

Portegies Zwart, S

S. Portegies Zwart, S. L. W . McMillan, E. van Elteren, I. Pelupessy, and N. de Vries. Multi- physics simulations using a hierarchical interchangeable software interface.Computer Physics Communications, 184(3):456–468, March 2013

2013
[197]

F . I. Pelupessy, A. van Elteren, N. de Vries, S. L. W . McMillan, N. Drost, and S. F . Portegies Zwart. The Astrophysical Multipurpose Software Environment.Astronomy & Astrophysics, 557:A84, September 2013

2013
[198]

2514-3433

Simon Portegies Zwart and Steve McMillan.Astrophysical Recipes. 2514-3433. IOP Publishing, 2018

2018
[199]

G. J. Ferland, K. T . Korista, D. A. V erner, J. W . Ferguson, J. B. Kingdon, and E. M. V erner. CLOUDY 90: Numerical Simulation of Plasmas and Their Spectra. Publications of the Astronomical Society of the P acific, 110(749):761–778, July 1998

1998
[200]

G. J. Ferland, R. L. Porter, P . A. M. van Hoof, R. J. R. Williams, N. P . Abel, M. L. Lykins, G. Shaw, W . J. Henney, and P . C. Stancil. The 2013 Release of Cloudy.Revista mexicana de astronomía y astrofísica, 49:137–163, April 2013

2013
[201]

G. J. Ferland, M. Chatzikos, F . Guzmán, M. L. Lykins, P . A. M. van Hoof, R. J. R. Williams, N. P . Abel, N. R. Badnell, F . P . Keenan, R. L. Porter, and P . C. Stancil. The 2017 Release Cloudy. Revista mexicana de astronomía y astrofísica, 53:385–438, October 2017

2017
[202]

Program for Promot- ing Researches on the Supercomputer Fugaku

Jean Kossaifi, Nikola Kovachki, Kamyar Azizzadenesheli, and Anima Anandkumar. Multi-grid tensorized fourier neural operator for high-resolution pdes.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.00120, 2023. 22 Appendix A Datasheet for The Well A.1 Motivation Q1 For what purpose was the dataset c...

2023 arXiv
[204]

SPH methods may encounter difficulties resolving contact discontinuities caused by shock waves (such as SN shells) with low mass resolution

is employed. SPH methods may encounter difficulties resolving contact discontinuities caused by shock waves (such as SN shells) with low mass resolution. Integration timesteps are determined by the resolution and thermal energy [194] so that the blastwave is resolved. Neverthe...

2015
[205]

As mentioned in the previous section, all models were scaled to obtain approximately 15-20 million parameters for 2D models

architecture for fairer evaluation. As mentioned in the previous section, all models were scaled to obtain approximately 15-20 million parameters for 2D models. W e prioritized reaching this with adjustments to depth or width rather than filter size or downsampling rates. The ...

1988
[206]

For all authors... (a) Do the main claims made in the abstract and introduction accurately reflect the paper’s contributions and scope? [Y es] (b) Did you describe the limitations of your work? [Y es] This is described in the conclusion. (c) Did you discuss any potential negat...
[207]

(a) Did you state the full set of assumptions of all theoretical results? [N/A] No theoretical results

If you are including theoretical results... (a) Did you state the full set of assumptions of all theoretical results? [N/A] No theoretical results. (b) Did you include complete proofs of all theoretical results? [N/A] No theoretical results
[208]

for benchmarks)

If you ran experiments (e.g. for benchmarks)... (a) Did you include the code, data, and instructions needed to reproduce the main experi- mental results (either in the supplemental material or as a URL)? [Y es] Code available https://github.com/PolymathicAI/the_well (b) Did yo...
[209]

(a) If your work uses existing assets, did you cite the creators? [Y es] Any existing code adapted for our purposes was cited

If you are using existing assets (e.g., code, data, models) or curating/releasing new assets... (a) If your work uses existing assets, did you cite the creators? [Y es] Any existing code adapted for our purposes was cited. (b) Did you mention the license of the assets? [Y es] ...
[210]

If you used crowdsourcing or conducted research with human subjects... (a) Did you include the full text of instructions given to participants and screenshots, if applicable? [N/A] (b) Did you describe any potential participant risks, with links to Institutional Review Board (...
[1997]

Special Issue on Time Integration

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Eyring, S

V . Eyring, S. Bony, G. A. Meehl, C. A. Senior, B. Stevens, R. J. Stouffer, and K. E. T aylor. Overview of the coupled model intercomparison project phase 6 (cmip6) experimental design and organization. Geoscientific Model Development, 9(5):1937–1958, 2016

1937

[2] [2]

Berger and Randall J

Marsha J. Berger and Randall J. LeV eque. Implicit adaptive mesh refinement for dispersive tsunami propagation, 2024

2024

[3] [3]

Graphcast: Learning skillful medium-range global weather forecasting.arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.12794, 2022

Remi Lam, Alvaro Sanchez-Gonzalez, Matthew Willson, Peter Wirnsberger, Meire Fortunato, Ferran Alet, Suman Ravuri, Timo Ewalds, Zach Eaton-Rosen, W eihua Hu, et al. Graphcast: Learning skillful medium-range global weather forecasting.arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.12794, 2022

arXiv 2022

[4] [4]

Large-scale pde-constrained optimization: an introduction

Lorenz T Biegler, Omar Ghattas, Matthias Heinkenschloss, and Bart van Bloemen W aanders. Large-scale pde-constrained optimization: an introduction. In Large-scale PDE-constrained optimization, pages 3–13. Springer, 2003

2003

[5] [5]

Shape optimization in fluid mechanics.Annu

Bijan Mohammadi and Olivier Pironneau. Shape optimization in fluid mechanics.Annu. Rev . Fluid Mech., 36:255–279, 2004

2004

[6] [6]

The frontier of simulation-based inference

Kyle Cranmer, Johann Brehmer, and Gilles Louppe. The frontier of simulation-based inference. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(48):30055–30062, 2020

2020

[7] [7]

Simbig: Field-level simulation-based inference of galaxy clustering, 2023

Pablo Lemos, Liam Parker, ChangHoon Hahn, Shirley Ho, Michael Eickenberg, Jiamin Hou, Elena Massara, Chirag Modi, Azadeh Moradinezhad Dizgah, Bruno Regaldo-Saint Blancard, and David Spergel. Simbig: Field-level simulation-based inference of galaxy clustering, 2023

2023

[8] [8]

American Mathematical Society, 2022

Lawrence C Evans.P artial differential equations, volume 19. American Mathematical Society, 2022. 11

2022