math.NAJul 29, 2026

Comparison of a Parametric Physics-Informed Neural Network and a Tensorial Reduced-Order Model for the Shallow-Water Dam-Break Problem

Authors: Anton MyshakMd Rezwan Bin MizanIlya Timofeyev

Organizations: Dept. of Mathematics, University of Houston, Houston, TX 77204

Abstract

We develop two parametric data-driven reduced models: a physics-informed neural network (PINN) and a non-intrusive tensorial reduced-order model (TROM), and apply both approaches to the parametrized one-dimensional shallow-water dam-break problem. Both reduced models do not require time integration and learn a direct solution map from space, time, and dam-break parameters to the physical state. We present a detailed comparison for out-of-sample and extrapolated parameter values. In addition, we demonstrate that it is essential to introduce shock-aware collocation to improve the robustness of the PINN model.

Explore similar work

May 9, 2026cs.LG

Finite Volume-Informed Neural Network Framework for 2D Shallow Water Equations: Rugged Loss Landscapes and the Importance of Data Guidance

Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) are a simple surrogate-modelling paradigm for partial differential equations, but their standard strong-form residual formulation is ill suited to the shallow water equations (SWE). It cannot enforce local conservation, handle discontinuities, or leverage the boundary-conforming unstructured meshes used in real-world applications. We introduce ``Data-Guided FVM-PINN'', a framework that replaces the strong-form residual with a differentiable, well-balanced Roe Riemann-solver finite-volume (FVM) loss evaluated on unstructured meshes. The major finding is that physics-only FVM-PINN training often fails on realistic 2D problems: the network collapses to a trivial low-momentum state that nearly satisfies the FVM-PINN residual but bears no resemblance to the true flow. A loss-landscape diagnostic shows that the FVM-PINN loss at zero momentum is only about 7×7\times larger than at the trained solution, a shallow basin that an ordinary optimizer falls into; adding even sparse data turns this into a 310×310\times separation, breaking the degeneracy. On a 2D block-in-channel benchmark, just 200200 random velocity measurements drop the velocity-field L2L_2 error by 22×22\times versus physics-only; 5050 measurements still deliver a 7×7\times reduction. A controlled ablation isolates the contribution of the FVM-PINN loss: it reduces velocity-field L2L_2 by \sim$$23\% in the sparse-data regime and is essentially neutral when dense reference data is available. On a real-world Savannah River reach (13061306 cells, 36003600~s simulation, five Manning zones), the framework constructs an accurate surrogate from SRH-2D anchor data, with time-window decomposition reducing error monotonically via progressive initial-condition handoff.
Xiaofeng Liu
Jun 23, 2026cs.LG

Silent Failures in Physics-Informed Neural Networks: Parameter Poisoning and the Limits of Loss-Based Validation

Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) embed governing equations in their loss function, enabling mesh-free solutions to partial differential equations. Low training loss is treated as evidence that the learned solution is physically correct. This paper shows that assumption breaks down when encoded physics are incorrect. By perturbing PDE parameters before training, a setting we describe as physics parameter poisoning or parameter misspecification, we produce models that train to low loss but give incorrect answers; we treat the perturbation schedule as sensitivity analysis rather than only as a security threat, and none of our claims requires an adversary. Achieving low residual loss does not discriminate accurate from inaccurate solutions: poisoned models reach losses at or below the clean baseline yet differ by large margins, so driving the residual down is not evidence of physical accuracy. Across three PDE systems (Burgers equation, Navier-Stokes cavity, and convection-diffusion), poisoned models match or beat the clean-model training loss while their solutions differ by up to 71% in the fixed sweep and up to 128% under adversarial search; at Cavity Re=400 the poisoned loss falls below the clean baseline. We define a detection difficulty ratio R (solution error divided by training loss) to summarize how invisible the corruption is, though cross-PDE comparison is complicated by differences in loss scale. We test six candidate defenses, none of which reliably detects corruption across all regimes. We propose a post-hoc defense: sweeping the PDE residual loss across parameter values without retraining. The loss minimum recovers the true training parameter without external data, and generalizes across all three PDE systems. The effect holds across five network architectures (8.7K to 133K parameters), is bidirectional, and is confirmed across multiple random seeds.
David McShannon, Nicholas Dietrich
Sep 21, 2026cs.LG

Learning Physics from an Imperfect Ancestor

Neural operators evaluate parametric partial differential equations cheaply but degrade sharply outside their training distribution. Physics-informed neural networks avoid dependence on labeled data, yet their optimization can be basin-fragile: when the governing residual admits multiple solutions, a PINN trained from scratch may converge to a physically incorrect state despite achieving a small residual. We show that these failure modes can be addressed jointly: an imperfect NO provides the structural prior needed to place a PINN in the correct solution basin, while the PDE residual refines the solution beyond the operator's accuracy. We introduce a three-stage framework that freezes the spatial basis of a physics-informed NO, extrapolates its solution branch to an out-of-distribution parameter using a polynomial continuation prior, and distills the resulting field into a fresh PINN. The NO need not be accurate at the target; it transfers solution-branch information, while PDE residual minimization in the PINN governs convergence. We evaluate the framework on three nonlinear PDEs: 1D viscous Burgers, 2D steady Allen-Cahn near a pitchfork bifurcation, and 2D steady lid-driven cavity flow. For Allen-Cahn, where the trivial solution satisfies the PDE residual exactly, a standard PINN collapses to the trivial zero branch, whereas distillation from the crude extrapolated operator recovers the non-trivial branch that matches the finite-difference reference. For the lid-driven cavity, extrapolating to a Reynolds number of Re = 3200 accelerates convergence to the correct physical state, achieving competitive accuracy using fewer parameters and optimization steps than recent literature baselines. These results establish a simple principle: an NO need not accurately predict the solution to be useful; it only needs to identify the correct basin from which PINN optimization can recover it.
S. Mohammad Mousavi, Teeratorn Kadeethum, Nikolaos Bouklas +1