arXiv:2602.10611cs.LGphysics.comp-ph2026-02

数据与物理方程不一致会限制神经网络精度,提出一致性屏障概念。

On the Role of Consistency Between Physics and Data in Physics-Informed Neural Networks

  • 定义一致性屏障:数据与方程不符导致的误差下限。
  • 低质量数据训练时模型误差饱和,无法超越数据不一致水平。
  • 高精度数值数据可消除屏障,使结果接近解析解。

物理信息神经网络(PINNs)作为偏微分方程(PDE)的代理建模方法备受关注,尤其在标注数据稀缺时,可通过物理约束正则化学习过程。然而实践中,实验或数值数据常因测量噪声、离散误差或建模假设与控制方程不一致。这种数据与PDE的不一致性对PINNs精度和收敛性的影响尚未被充分理解。本文系统分析数据不一致如何从根本上限制PINNs的可达精度。引入“一致性屏障”概念,即由数据保真度与精确施加PDE残差之间的不匹配所导致的内在误差下限。通过1D黏性Burgers方程的构造解析解,可完全控制数据保真度与残差误差。使用不同精度的数值数据及完全一致的解析数据进行训练。结果显示,虽然引入PDE残差可部分缓解低保真度数据影响并恢复主导物理结构,但训练最终会饱和于由数据不一致决定的误差水平。当采用高保真度数值数据时,PINN解与解析数据训练结果无差异,表明一致性屏障基本消除。这些发现揭示了数据质量与物理约束在PINNs中的相互作用,为构建和解释物理信息代理模型提供实用指导。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) have gained significant attention as a surrogate modeling strategy for partial differential equations (PDEs), particularly in regimes where labeled data are scarce and physical constraints can be leveraged to regularize the learning process. In practice, however, PINNs are frequently trained using experimental or numerical data that are not fully consistent with the governing equations due to measurement noise, discretization errors, or modeling assumptions. The implications of such data-to-PDE inconsistencies on the accuracy and convergence of PINNs remain insufficiently understood. In this work, we systematically analyze how data inconsistency fundamentally limits the attainable accuracy of PINNs. We introduce the concept of a consistency barrier, defined as an intrinsic lower bound on the error that arises from mismatches between the fidelity of the data and the exact enforcement of the PDE residual. To isolate and quantify this effect, we consider the 1D viscous Burgers equation with a manufactured analytical solution, which enables full control over data fidelity and residual errors. PINNs are trained using datasets of progressively increasing numerical accuracy, as well as perfectly consistent analytical data. Results show that while the inclusion of the PDE residual allows PINNs to partially mitigate low-fidelity data and recover the dominant physical structure, the training process ultimately saturates at an error level dictated by the data inconsistency. When high-fidelity numerical data are employed, PINN solutions become indistinguishable from those trained on analytical data, indicating that the consistency barrier is effectively removed. These findings clarify the interplay between data quality and physics enforcement in PINNs providing practical guidance for the construction and interpretation of physics-informed surrogate models.

PINNs物理信息误差分析数据一致性

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。