Active Learning for Neural PDE Solvers
About
Solving partial differential equations (PDEs) is a fundamental problem in science and engineering. While neural PDE solvers can be more efficient than established numerical solvers, they often require large amounts of training data that is costly to obtain. Active learning (AL) could help surrogate models reach the same accuracy with smaller training sets by querying classical solvers with more informative initial conditions and PDE parameters. While AL is more common in other domains, it has yet to be studied extensively for neural PDE solvers. To bridge this gap, we introduce AL4PDE, a modular and extensible active learning benchmark. It provides multiple parametric PDEs and state-of-the-art surrogate models for the solver-in-the-loop setting, enabling the evaluation of existing and the development of new AL methods for neural PDE solving. We use the benchmark to evaluate batch active learning algorithms such as uncertainty- and feature-based methods. We show that AL reduces the average error by up to 71% compared to random sampling and significantly reduces worst-case errors. Moreover, AL generates similar datasets across repeated runs, with consistent distributions over the PDE parameters and initial conditions. The acquired datasets are reusable, providing benefits for surrogate models not involved in the data generation.
Related benchmarks
| Task | Dataset | Result | Rank | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PDE solving | Navier-Stokes 2D | -- | 34 | |
| PDE solving | 2D Kuramoto-Sivashinsky (test) | Mean Error0.93 | 27 | |
| PDE Surrogate Modeling | 2D Kuramoto-Sivashinsky and Gray-Scott | Mean Error0.96 | 24 | |
| PDE solving | Navier-Stokes 2D (test) | Relative MSE Loss1.06 | 24 | |
| Active Learning | 2D Navier-Stokes Kolmogorov flow (test) | Mean Error0.98 | 21 | |
| Solving Burgers equation | Burgers 1D | RMSE0.0038 | 15 | |
| PDE solving | 2D Gray-Scott | Mean Error1.35 | 14 | |
| Partial Differential Equation (PDE) Solving | Gray-Scott PDE (test) | Mean Improvement Ratio1.01 | 12 | |
| Fluid Dynamics Prediction | 2D Navier-Stokes Kolmogorov flow (test) | Mean Error0.98 | 7 | |
| 2D Kuramoto-Sivashinsky PDE Simulation | 2D Kuramoto-Sivashinsky | Mean Error4.41 | 7 |