From inverse problems to neural operators: prediction, mechanism, and generalization of data-driven models

2026-06-08Machine Learning

Machine Learning
AI summary

The authors explain how scientists have traditionally used math equations to link causes and effects in physical systems. They describe newer machine learning approaches that either learn these equations directly, or skip equations altogether to predict outcomes. The authors argue that all these methods share a common structure but differ in how they model the input-output relationship. They suggest only certain models can truly discover underlying mechanisms, which helps with general understanding and prediction. Their work aims to clarify how these diverse techniques relate and when to use each.

Differential EquationsScientific Machine LearningSparse Identification of Nonlinear DynamicsNeural Ordinary Differential EquationsNeural OperatorsInverse ProblemsModeling FrameworkMechanism DiscoveryData-driven ModelingPhilosophy of Science
Authors
Conor Rowan
Abstract
Scientists have historically relied on mathematical models based on differential equations to relate system inputs -- forces, fluxes, or heat sources -- to outputs, such as displacement, velocity, concentration, and temperature. These models rely on deep domain knowledge to determine the form of the governing differential equation, which is then calibrated with data by solving an inverse problem. In recent years, the field of Scientific Machine Learning has introduced a variety of alternative modeling strategies for physical systems. A method called Sparse Identification of Nonlinear Dynamics learns the governing equation as a sparse linear combination of terms in a user-defined library. Neural Ordinary Differential Equations construct the governing equation by taking in the state and its derivatives at the input layer of a neural network. Entirely foregoing the modeling framework of differential equations, neural operators directly learn a non-linear mapping between the system inputs and outputs. From inverse problems to neural operators, all of these modeling strategies can be conceptualized as data-driven machinery to predict a system's response over a range of inputs. It is then natural to wonder how exactly these various strategies relate to each other, and whether they can be neatly taxonomized. Drawing from the philosophical literature on scientific models, we argue that many model types have a common structure, differing only in the assumed model class of the input-output relation they define. Connecting to philosophical ideas on mechanism, and arguing that data from physical systems arises from solutions to parsimonious differential equations, we propose that only certain models are capable of mechanism discovery, and thus generalization. Our analysis is intended to unite apparently disparate modeling strategies and provide insight into their appropriate use cases.