ArticleChaos (Woodbury, N.Y.)2020
Coarse-scale PDEs from fine-scale observations via machine learning.
Article in Chaos (Woodbury, N.Y.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Going with the flow to solve for symmetry-driven PDE dynamics with physics-informed neural networks.Nature communications · 2026Article
- From disorganized data to emergent dynamic models: Questionnaires to partial differential equations.PNAS nexus · 2025Article
- Data-driven discovery of chemotactic migration of bacteria via coordinate-invariant machine learning.BMC bioinformatics · 2024Article
- Task-oriented machine learning surrogates for tipping points of agent-based models.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Recurrent neural networks for dynamical systems: Applications to ordinary differential equations, collective motion, and hydrological modeling.Chaos (Woodbury, N.Y.) · 2023Article
- Learning emergent partial differential equations in a learned emergent space.Nature communications · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Complex spatiotemporal dynamics of physicochemical processes are often modeled at a microscopic level (through, e.g., atomistic, agent-based, or lattice models) based on first principles. Some of these processes can also be successfully modeled at the macroscopic level using, e.g., partial differential equations (PDEs) describing the evolution of the right few macroscopic observables (e.g., concentration and momentum fields). Deriving good macroscopic descriptions (the so-called "closure problem") is often a time-consuming process requiring deep understanding/intuition about the system of interest. Recent developments in data science provide alternative ways to effectively extract/learn accurate macroscopic descriptions approximating the underlying microscopic observations. In this paper, we introduce a data-driven framework for the identification of unavailable coarse-scale PDEs from microscopic observations via machine-learning algorithms. Specifically, using Gaussian processes, artificial neural networks, and/or diffusion maps, the proposed framework uncovers the relation between the relevant macroscopic space fields and their time evolution (the right-hand side of the explicitly unavailable macroscopic PDE). Interestingly, several choices equally representative of the data can be discovered. The framework will be illustrated through the data-driven discovery of macroscopic, concentration-level PDEs resulting from a fine-scale, lattice Boltzmann level model of a reaction/transport process. Once the coarse evolution law is identified, it can be simulated to produce long-term macroscopic predictions. Different features (pros as well as cons) of alternative machine-learning algorithms for performing this task (Gaussian processes and artificial neural networks) are presented and discussed.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.