Reformulating Neural Operators in $d+1$ Dimensions for Embedding Evolution
About
Neural Operators (NOs) are powerful architectures for learning mappings between function spaces. While most advances focus on refining kernel parameterizations over the $d$-dimensional physical domain, the evolution of lifted embeddings remains underexplored, which often drives models toward computationally expensive embedding-scaling designs to improve approximation. In this paper, we introduce an auxiliary function dimension that models embedding evolution in operator form, thereby reformulating the NO pipeline in $d+1$ dimensions. We instantiate this framework via Fourier-based operators acting jointly on the physical and auxiliary domains, yielding a basis-diversified auxiliary evolution module as an alternative to brute-force embedding scaling. Across more than ten increasingly challenging benchmarks, ranging from the 1D heat equation to the highly nonlinear 3D Rayleigh-Taylor instability, our model consistently achieves the lowest relative $L_2$ error among the evaluated baselines. Crucially, this advantage is empirically supported by (1) controlled budget-aware comparisons against scaled and ablated baselines; (2) robustness under mixed-resolution training and super-resolution inference; and (3) zero-shot generalization to unseen temporal regimes. In addition, we present a broader set of design choices for lifting and recovery operators, demonstrating their impact on our model's predictive performance.
Related benchmarks
| Task | Dataset | Result | Rank | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-term forecasting | 2D Navier-Stokes | Relative L2 Error (Rollout)8.077 | 16 | |
| 2d Darcy Flow | 2D Darcy Flow | Relative L2 Error0.55 | 12 | |
| Conservation-law dynamics prediction | Shallow Water | Relative L2 Error0.0027 | 11 | |
| Operator learning | 1D Burgers | Relative L2 Error5.475 | 11 | |
| Operator learning | 2D Strain | Relative L2 Error4.635 | 4 | |
| Operator learning | 2D Darcy | Rel. L2 Error5.555 | 4 | |
| Operator learning | 2D Gray-Scott | Relative L2 Error1.298 | 4 | |
| Operator learning | 3D Comp. NS | Relative L2 Error0.0238 | 4 | |
| Operator learning | 3D RT | Relative L2 Error0.0447 | 4 | |
| Operator learning | 2D Stress | Relative L2 Error4.724 | 4 |