This paper is a step-by-step, self-contained guide to the complete training cycle of a Physics-Informed Neural Network (PINN) -- a topic that existing tutorials and guides typically delegate to automatic differentiation libraries without exposing the underlying algebra. Using a first-order initial value problem with a known analytical solution as a running example, we walk through every stage of the process: forward propagation of both the network output and its temporal derivative, evaluation of a composite loss function built from the ODE residual and the initial condition, backpropagation of gradients -- with particular attention to the product rule that arises in hidden layers -- and a gradient descent parameter update. Every calculation is presented with explicit, verifiable numerical values using a 1-3-3-1 multilayer perceptron with two hidden layers and 22 trainable parameters. From these concrete examples, we derive general recursive formulas -- expressed as sensitivity propagation relations -- that extend the gradient computation to networks of arbitrary depth, and we connect these formulas to the automatic differentiation engines used in practice. The trained network is then validated against the exact solution, achieving a relative L2 error of 4.290×10−4 using only the physics-informed loss, without any data from the true solution. A companion Jupyter/PyTorch notebook reproduces every manual calculation and the full training pipeline, providing mutual validation between hand-derived and machine-computed gradients.
This paper traces, with explicit numerical values, how PyTorch's automatic differentiation (AD) engine computes gradients for Physics-Informed Neural Network (PINN) training -- a setting that requires two levels of differentiation: computing the physics derivative y^′(t)=dy^/dt through the network, and computing parameter gradients ∇θL of a loss that itself depends on y^′(t). Using a 1-3-3-1 multilayer perceptron and the initial value problem y′(t)+y(t)=0, y(0)=1, we trace the complete pipeline at every node: the computational graph built during the forward pass, the reverse-mode backward traversal that computes all 22 parameter gradients in a single pass, and the graph-on-graph mechanism by which \texttt{create_graph=True} enables correct differentiation through the physics-informed residual. Every adjoint value is verified against the hand derivations of Tahimi (2026), connecting the P/Q sensitivity framework to the vector--Jacobian products used by PyTorch's autograd engine.
We systematically investigate finite-difference (FD) derivative computation in Physics-Informed Neural Networks (PINNs) as an alternative to automatic differentiation (AD). On three benchmark PDEs we show that, with a properly calibrated step size, FD matches AD in accuracy on every problem while running faster across the full tested batch-size range and using substantially less GPU memory, and that a stochastic variant we propose outperforms AD on a stationary problem. We further show that for neural architectures with inter-sample dependencies (e.g. BatchNorm, self-attention) the standard PyTorch autograd idiom is silently incorrect; the correct per-sample alternative is computationally infeasible at PINN-relevant batch sizes, while FD provides a forward-only approximation that is empirically an order of magnitude closer to the true per-sample derivative.
Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) offer a mesh-free framework for solving partial differential equations (PDEs), yet training often suffers from gradient pathologies, spectral bias, and poor convergence, especially for problems with strong nonlinearity, sharp gradients, or multiscale features. We propose the Curriculum-Guided Gaussian Mixture Physics-Informed Neural Network (CGMPINN), which integrates Gaussian mixture modeling with dynamic curriculum learning. Specifically, a GMM is periodically fitted to the PDE residual distribution to quantify spatially varying learning difficulty. A smooth curriculum schedule progressively shifts training focus from easy to harder regions, while precision-based variance modulation suppresses unreliable clusters during early optimization. This dual curriculum is governed by a shared curriculum parameter and can be combined with self-adaptive loss balancing. We further establish theoretical guarantees, including sublinear convergence of the gradient norm for the induced time-varying loss, uniform equivalence between the curriculum-weighted and standard PDE losses, and a generalization bound with an explicit weighting-induced bias characterization. Experiments on six benchmark PDEs spanning elliptic, parabolic, hyperbolic, advection-dominated, and nonlinear reaction-diffusion types show that CGMPINN consistently achieves the lowest relative L2 and maximum absolute errors among all compared methods, reducing relative L2 error by up to 97.8% over the standard PINN at comparable cost. Our code is publicly available at https://github.com/Mathematics-Yang/CGMPINN.