Open
Conversation
Brief description of the tutorial
vinay31568
changed the title
Updated with a comparison
Author
|
@ChrisRackauckas I have tried to create a tutorial comparing the results of a PINN with a numerical solver, but the build is failing , could I get some advice on fixing this? |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Trusting PINNs: Validating a Neural Solver against a standard numerical solver
I want to add a new tutorial , through this PR that validates a PINN solver's results against a ground truth generated by using a traditional numerical solver in the MethodOfLines.jl library for the 1D Viscous Burgers' equation. As discussed in Issue #982, this tutorial could possibly serve the purpose of explicitly comparing scientific machine learning (SciML) approaches with classical numerical solvers.