Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
97 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
53 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
44 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
5 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

When Do Extended Physics-Informed Neural Networks (XPINNs) Improve Generalization? (2109.09444v7)

Published 20 Sep 2021 in cs.LG, cs.NA, math.DS, math.NA, and stat.ML

Abstract: Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) have become a popular choice for solving high-dimensional partial differential equations (PDEs) due to their excellent approximation power and generalization ability. Recently, Extended PINNs (XPINNs) based on domain decomposition methods have attracted considerable attention due to their effectiveness in modeling multiscale and multiphysics problems and their parallelization. However, theoretical understanding on their convergence and generalization properties remains unexplored. In this study, we take an initial step towards understanding how and when XPINNs outperform PINNs. Specifically, for general multi-layer PINNs and XPINNs, we first provide a prior generalization bound via the complexity of the target functions in the PDE problem, and a posterior generalization bound via the posterior matrix norms of the networks after optimization. Moreover, based on our bounds, we analyze the conditions under which XPINNs improve generalization. Concretely, our theory shows that the key building block of XPINN, namely the domain decomposition, introduces a tradeoff for generalization. On the one hand, XPINNs decompose the complex PDE solution into several simple parts, which decreases the complexity needed to learn each part and boosts generalization. On the other hand, decomposition leads to less training data being available in each subdomain, and hence such model is typically prone to overfitting and may become less generalizable. Empirically, we choose five PDEs to show when XPINNs perform better than, similar to, or worse than PINNs, hence demonstrating and justifying our new theory.

User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (4)
  1. Zheyuan Hu (23 papers)
  2. Ameya D. Jagtap (21 papers)
  3. George Em Karniadakis (216 papers)
  4. Kenji Kawaguchi (147 papers)
Citations (73)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.