Papers for

aerospace simulation teams

Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.

New method improves learning smooth dynamics from position and velocity data

Learning smooth dynamics via Kinematic Interpolants

Abstract: Inferring dynamics from real-world experimental data is inherently ambiguous, as many plausible dynamical systems can explain the same positional observations at measurement times. For higher fidelity modeling of applications ranging from single-cell RNA to vortex dynamics and even flocking of birds, scientific observables increasingly also include velocity estimates that serve to resolve this issue. However, incorporating this rich information in a scalable manner, free of simulation or unnecessary approximations, has remained a difficult challenge. In this paper, we introduce Kinematic Interpolants (KI), a novel framework that extends the seminal methodology of stochastic interpolants to infer nonlinear dynamics across multiple snapshots in phase space, i.e., observables with position and velocity measurements. Empirically, we demonstrate that across several scientific datasets, KI achieves superior reconstruction of the underlying dynamics compared to existing baselines while requiring only a fraction of the training time.

Thu 15 OctMachine Learning
The gist
Many different rules can explain how things move when we only look at their positions at certain times. The authors found a better way to use information about both positions and speeds to learn the underlying rules of movement. Their approach, called Kinematic Interpolants, works well for complex systems like cells, fluids, or birds moving together, and it learns faster than other methods.
Open → 2610.22519v1

Model improves steady PDE solutions on coarse unstructured meshes

Learnable Hodge-Laplacian Driven Mixture of Experts for Steady-PDE Surrogates on Coarse Unstructured Meshes

Abstract: Current approaches for steady partial differential equations surrogate models on unstructured meshes apply a single mixing mechanism to the whole solution. This paper proposes an architecture that partitions the solution among vanilla transformer experts, each focused on a different spectral scale. The partition is built from a discrete Hodge Laplacian $L_0=\star_0^{-1} d_0^{\top}\star_1 d_0$, that serves as a fitting layer measuring high-frequency content. A gating mechanism takes the mesh as input and produces the per-vertex weights that recombine the expert outputs. AirFRANS is a steady Reynolds-averaged Navier--Stokes (RANS) airfoil benchmark. We evaluate our approach in a reduced remeshed version of the benchmark with each unstructured mesh counting 9.6K faces and 4.9K vertices. We compare our approach with the Transolver on the same dataset and dataset slit. Our approach reduces relative $L_2$ error by 31\% and interior mean squared error by 47\%.

Wed 14 OctMachine LearningComputer Vision and Pattern Recognition
The gist
Simulating steady physical processes described by partial differential equations (PDEs) on irregular shapes is challenging and often slow. The authors introduce a machine learning method that splits the simulation into parts focusing on different scales of detail, learned from mesh structure. This approach improves prediction accuracy for airflow over airfoils compared to previous methods. Their model works well on coarser, unstructured meshes, making simulations potentially more efficient.
Open → 2610.20585v1

Neural surrogates predict engineering uncertainty across shapes and tasks

Predictive Uncertainty for Neural CAE Surrogates

Abstract: Neural surrogates can substantially accelerate computer-aided engineering (CAE) workflows, but their use in design requires uncertainty estimates that remain meaningful across varying geometries, spatial prediction fields, and engineering quantities of interest. We investigate how established uncertainty quantification (UQ) approaches behave when adapted to geometry-conditioned neural surrogates. We compare one closed-form and two sampling-based approaches-a Gaussian process (GP)-based method, concrete Monte Carlo (MC) dropout, and deep ensembles-and evaluate them on three large, industry-relevant CAE datasets for external aerodynamics and crash dynamics. We examine whether predicted uncertainties have credible magnitudes, identify locations with larger prediction errors, respond to unfamiliar inputs, and remain informative for derived engineering quantities. On the DrivAerStar dataset, where all three methods are compared, each generally assigns higher uncertainty to locations with larger prediction errors, and validation-based rescaling brings interval coverage close to nominal on a disjoint in-distribution test set. Results on AirFRANS and automotive crash also show useful error ranking and interval estimates, but the relative performance of the methods changes with the dataset and evaluation criterion. UQ methods and evaluation metrics should therefore be selected based on the intended downstream CAE decision.

Mon 21 SeptMachine LearningArtificial Intelligence
The gist
Computer simulations can take a long time, so people use neural networks as faster guessers called neural surrogates. But when designing things, it's important to know how uncertain these guesses are, especially when the shapes or conditions change a lot. The authors studied different ways to measure this uncertainty in neural surrogates across several big engineering problems like car aerodynamics and crash safety. They found each method can identify where predictions might be wrong and respond well to new, unfamiliar situations, but the best method depends on the specific task and data. This means engineers should choose their uncertainty measurements based on what decisions they need to make.
Open → 2609.25430v1

Neural turbulence closures improve solution stability and uniqueness

Well-posedness of neural turbulence closures and tangent dissipation

Abstract: A neural turbulence closure defines a new boundary-value problem, $R(U)=N(U)+F(U)=0$, with a coupled Jacobian $J(U)=N'(U)+F'(U)$, where $N$ is the original mean-flow operator and $F$ the learned closure. We establish two consequences of global tangent dissipation. For a monotone original operator, a positive uniform margin supplied by the original operator and closure together guarantees existence, uniqueness and a global inverse-sensitivity bound relating a posteriori solution error to the a priori residual. For a general original operator, a dissipative closure cannot worsen tangent dissipation, but this alone does not guarantee uniqueness. Tangent dissipation depends on both diffusion and reaction. We study two complementary ways to promote it: (1) an exact-integral construction enforcing non-negative tangent diffusion while leaving reaction unconstrained, and (2) a penalty on tangent-reaction violations at sampled states. Tangent diffusion enters the Jacobian, and non-negative secant eddy viscosity alone does not control its coercivity. We conduct tests with channel flow at $Re_τ=180$--$5200$, which provides a strongly monotone baseline. Both constrained closures reach accurate solutions in all 50 training-seed/Reynolds-number cases. At $Re_τ=1000$, we conduct tests with 10,000 starts for one fixed network per closure and we find one root for each constrained closure and multiple roots for the other closures. Although this does not prove uniqueness, it provides strong empirical evidence for uniqueness of the tested constrained closures. At $Re_τ=5200$, the construction and penalty reduce the reported inverse sensitivity relative to the original operator by approximately $372\times$ and $11\times$, respectively.

Thu 17 SeptMachine Learning
The gist
Simulating turbulent flows is hard because approximations called closures can cause unpredictable solutions. This paper shows that by designing these closures with certain mathematical properties, you can ensure stable, unique solutions that match real flow behavior better. The authors tested their method on flow through a channel and found that their approach reliably found a single solution while other methods sometimes found many. This work supports more robust turbulence simulations using neural networks.
Open → 2609.19647v1