Abstract
Inverse problems governed by partial differential equations (PDEs) are central to computational mechanics and are commonly solved by adjoint-based optimization, while physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) have emerged as a flexible alternative. Their relative performance remains difficult to assess because the two approaches are often compared under different formulations, parameterizations, optimizers, and regularization choices. We present a fair comparison of adjoint optimization and PINNs for PDE-constrained inverse problems. From a common abstract formulation, we instantiate both methods on identical domains, governing equations, observation models, and regularization terms, while matching the optimizer, unknown parameterization, and arithmetic precision wherever applicable. The benchmarks include unsteady Burgers, noisy Darcy permeability inversion, three-dimensional Allen--Cahn reaction identification, and unsteady Navier--Stokes viscosity identification. The results show that the representation of the unknown largely determines the preferred method: grid-based fields favor the discrete adjoint, whereas neural representations are native to PINNs and relevant for closure and constitutive modeling. For time-dependent problems, adjoint inversion can be dominated by trajectory storage and differentiation, while PINNs provide satisfactory reconstructions at lower cost. A PINN-warm-started adjoint strategy then recovers adjoint-level accuracy at substantially reduced cost.
Explore similar work
May 8, 2026cs.LG
Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) provide a flexible framework for solving forward and inverse problems governed by partial differential equations (PDEs), but standard PINN training typically relies on soft penalty formulations that combine PDE residuals, data mismatch, and initial/boundary conditions using manually chosen weights. This often leads to ill-conditioning, sensitivity to loss weights, and poor constraint satisfaction. In this work, we reformulate PINN training as an equality-constrained optimization problem and propose a novel Adaptive Momentum Feedback Linearization Optimization for Hard Constrained PINN (AdamFLIP). The key idea is to view the constraint residuals as the output of a controlled dynamical system and to compute the Lagrange multiplier as a feedback input that locally drives these residuals toward stable linear contraction dynamics. AdamFLIP then applies Adam-style first- and second-moment adaptation to the resulting feedback-linearized Lagrangian gradient, combining principled constraint handling with the scalability and robustness of adaptive neural-network optimization. We test AdamFLIP on a range of benchmark forward and inverse PDE problem, and it consistently outperforms both the standard soft-constrained PINN and state-of-the-art constrained optimizers. Specifically, on the Navier--Stokes equations benchmark, AdamFLIP \textbf{reduces relative
L2 error by more than two thirds} for the predicted solution compared to the next best method. Our AdamFLIP framework provides an effective and computationally scalable hard constraint optimization method for PINN training.
Binghang Lu, Runyu Zhang, Changhong Mou +2
May 25, 2026cs.LG
Inverse problems in partial differential equations (PDEs) involve estimating the physical parameters of a system from observed spatiotemporal solution fields. Neural networks are well-suited for PDE parameter estimation due to their capability to model function-to-function space transformations. While existing benchmarks of machine learning methods for PDEs primarily focus on the forward problem, there are no similar comprehensive studies and benchmark datasets on PDE inverse problems, i.e., mapping solution fields to underlying physical parameters. We fill this gap by introducing PDEInvBench, a comprehensive benchmark dataset consisting of numerical simulations for both time-dependent and time-independent PDEs across a wide range of physical behaviors and parameters. Our dataset includes evaluation splits that assess performance in both in-distribution and various out-of-distribution settings. Using our benchmark dataset, we comprehensively explore the design space of neural networks for PDE inverse problems along three key dimensions: (1) optimization procedures, analyzing the role of supervised, self-supervised, and test-time training objectives on performance, (2) problem representations, where we study the value of architectural choices with different inductive biases and various conditioning strategies, and (3) scaling, which we perform with respect to both model and data size. Our experiments reveal several practical insights: 1) neural networks perform best with a two-stage training procedure: initial supervision with PDE parameters followed by test-time fine-tuning using the PDE residual, 2) incorporating PDE derivatives as input features consistently improves accuracy, and 3) increasing the diversity of initial conditions in the training data yields greater performance gains than expanding the range of PDE parameters. We make our dataset and codebase publicly available.
Divyam Goel, Nithin Chalapathi, Sanjeev Raja +1
Sep 7, 2026math.NA
Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) represent a growing frontier in using artificial intelligence to solve partial differential equations (PDEs). Automatic differentiation (AD) plays a central role in this paradigm, which is mesh-free and replaces traditional iterative solvers with gradient-based optimization in continuous space. However, the inherent limitations of AD, particularly in handling higher-order derivatives and discontinuous solutions, pose significant challenges for complex problems. This has motivated a growing number of researchers to explore discretization-based constraints as an alternative path. Yet, the respective applicability of these two paradigms remains largely unexplored. In this work, we conduct systematic experiments across a wide spectrum of problems, from simple linear Poisson to high-Mach hypersonic flows with strong discontinuities. Through a rigorous decomposition of approximation, optimization, and truncation errors, we systematically elucidate the fundamental trade-offs and error-governing mechanisms of both paradigms, as well as two representative network architectures: multi-layer perceptron (MLP) and graph neural network (GNN). Our results reveal a consistent trend: as nonlinearity strengthens, the accuracy advantage of discretization-based constraints becomes increasingly pronounced, with smaller optimization errors compensating for the truncation errors. Moreover, the more complex the nonlinearity and boundary conditions, the greater the advantage of GNN over MLP. These insights offer a robust practical guideline for configuring neural PDE solvers in demanding engineering applications. Our source data and code are available at https://github.com/guoxing0809/neuropde_analysis.
Xing Guo, Hongwei Tang, Zewei Meng +3