U-HNO: A U-shaped Hybrid Neural Operator with Sparse-Point Adaptive Routing for Non-stationary PDE Dynamics
About
Solutions to many partial differential equations (PDEs) display coexisting smooth global transport and localized sharp features within a single trajectory: shock fronts, thin interfaces, and concentrated high-frequency content sit on top of slowly varying backgrounds. This poses a challenge for neural operators: Fourier-based architectures mix nonlocal interactions efficiently but tend to under-resolve localized non-smooth features, whereas spatially local architectures recover fine detail at the cost of long-range propagation and rollout stability. Existing hybrid operators paper over this tension with a fixed, spatially uniform fusion that forces the same trade-off everywhere. We propose U-HNO, a U-shaped hybrid neural operator whose central design is Sparse-Point Adaptive Routing (SPAR): at every spatial location, a per-pixel hard mask selects whether the global Fourier branch or the local multi-scale Gaussian branch should dominate, and the sparsity ratio is a function of the local contrast of the routing signal, so smooth and shock-aligned regions receive different mixtures of global and local computation. SPAR is embedded in a hierarchical encoder-bottleneck-decoder backbone with skip connections so that the dual branches and the gate operate at every resolution. Training combines pointwise supervision with a finite-difference H^1 gradient term and a band-wise spectral consistency regularizer. Across benchmarks spanning 1D Burgers, Kuramoto-Sivashinsky, KdV, 2D advection, Allen-Cahn, Navier-Stokes, Darcy flow, and 3D transonic compressible Navier-Stokes from PDEBench, U-HNO achieves state-of-the-art rollout accuracy on the majority of tasks in both relative L^2 and H^1 metrics, with the largest gains on problems dominated by sharp localized features. Ablations show that removing any single component substantially degrades rollout error.
Related benchmarks
| Task | Dataset | Result | Rank | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PDE solving | Darcy (test) | Relative Error0.72 | 11 | |
| PDE Rollout Prediction | Burgers trajectory set (test) | Rollout Relative H14.18 | 8 | |
| PDE Rollout Prediction | KS trajectory set (test) | Relative H1 Error40.55 | 8 | |
| PDE Rollout Prediction | KdV trajectory set (test) | Rollout Relative H1 Error0.0523 | 8 | |
| PDE Rollout Prediction | Darcy trajectory set (test) | Rollout Relative H1 Error0.0165 | 8 | |
| PDE Rollout Simulation | Burgers' (test) | Relative L2 Error4.16 | 8 | |
| PDE Rollout Simulation | KdV (test) | Rollout Relative L2 Error5.02 | 8 | |
| Long-Horizon Stability | NS-2D (test) | MSE0.0066 | 8 | |
| PDE Rollout Simulation | KS (test) | Relative L2 Error (Rollout)0.405 | 8 | |
| PDE Rollout Prediction | NS-2D trajectory set (test) | Rollout Relative H1 Error0.9 | 8 |