ArticleScientific reports2025
Joint learning equation of state surfaces with uncertainty-aware physically regularized neural networks.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The equation of state (EOS) is essential for understanding material behavior under different pressure-temperature-volume (P-T-V) conditions across various disciplines. Traditional models, such as the Mie-Gr[Formula: see text]neisen-Debye equation, rely on thermodynamic assumptions and expert knowledge, while classical Gaussian process based machine learning approaches can be sensitive to choice of kernels and are limited by scalability and extrapolability. To overcome these limitations, we propose EOSNN, a neural network based physics informed deep learning method that jointly learns multiple EOS surfaces from diverse data sources, including static and dynamic compression and ab initio calculations. Additionally, a probabilistic model is developed to account for both aleatoric and epistemic uncertainties. Our numerical experiments show that EOSNN outperforms traditional and Gaussian process methods in several aspects including accuracy, flexibility under different constraints, and extensibility for various tasks and constraints. Particularly on the challenging partially supervised task where energy information is limited on part of the Hugoniot curve, our method's prediction for the energy off-Hugoniot can still reach a [Formula: see text] score as high as 0.83 and RMSE as low as 0.52 eV/atom with proper selection of regularization for physical consistency. This result shows a significant improvement over the case without regularization, with an increase of 0.2 in [Formula: see text] and a reduction of 0.26 eV/atom in energy prediction error, and is even slightly better than the fully supervised case for traditional regression method based on the Mie-Gr[Formula: see text]neisen equation. These benefits can be further enhanced with physics-informed regularizations on quantities such as heat capacity ([Formula: see text]), Gr[Formula: see text]neisen parameter (γ) or bulk modulus ([Formula: see text]).
Indexed as
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.