Symbolic Regression for PDEs using Pruned Differentiable Programs
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Physics-informed Neural Networks (PINNs) have been widely used to obtain accurate neural surrogates for a system of Partial Differential Equations (PDE). One of the major limitations of PINNs is that the neural solutions are challenging to interpret, and are often treated as black-box solvers. While Symbolic Regression (SR) has been studied extensively, very few works exist which generate analytical expressions to directly perform SR for a system of PDEs. In this work, we introduce an end-to-end framework for obtaining mathematical expressions for solutions of PDEs. We use a trained PINN to generate a dataset, upon which we perform SR. We use a Differentiable Program Architecture (DPA) defined using context-free grammar to describe the space of symbolic expressions. We improve the interpretability by pruning the DPA in a depth-first manner using the magnitude of weights as our heuristic. On average, we observe a 95.3% reduction in parameters of DPA while maintaining accuracy at par with PINNs. Furthermore, on an average, pruning improves the accuracy of DPA by 7.81% . We demonstrate our framework outperforms the existing state-of-the-art SR solvers on systems of complex PDEs like Navier-Stokes: Kovasznay flow and Taylor-Green Vortex flow. Furthermore, we produce analytical expressions for a complex industrial use-case of an Air-Preheater, without suffering from performance loss viz-a-viz PINNs.
Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 29 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Mar 2023.
Builds on
15 of 29 references.
References · 15
- 2019AI Feynman: a Physics-Inspired Method for Symbolic Regressioncited by 536
- 2019Deep symbolic regression: Recovering mathematical expressions from data via risk-seeking policy gradientscited by 294
- 2019Deep Learning for Symbolic Mathematicscited by 266
- 2020AI Feynman 2.0: Pareto-optimal symbolic regression exploiting graph modularitycited by 140
- 2017RobustFill: Neural Program Learning under Noisy I/Ocited by 124
- 2021SymbolicGPT: A Generative Transformer Model for Symbolic Regressioncited by 101
- 2022Symbolic Regression is NP-hardcited by 68
- 2022Error estimates for physics informed neural networks approximating the Navier-Stokes equationscited by 63
- 2018Neural Program Synthesis with Priority Queue Trainingcited by 24
- 2022Deep Learning and Symbolic Regression for Discovering Parametric Equationscited by 22
- 2022Taylor Genetic Programming for Symbolic Regressioncited by 18
- 2019Data-driven PDE discovery with evolutionary approachcited by 7
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 4; 2025: 1; 2026: 1.
6 papers.
- 2024Neuro-Symbolic AI: Explainability, Challenges, and Future Trendscited by 10
- 2025StruSR: Structure-Aware Symbolic Regression with Physics-Informed Taylor Guidancecited by 5
- 2024Closed-form Solutions: A New Perspective on Solving Differential Equationscited by 2
- 2024Concept-driven Off Policy Evaluationcited by 1
- 2024Bridging the Gap: Representation Spaces in Neuro-Symbolic AIcited by 0
- 2026An Interpretable Approach to PDE Solution Discovery via Structural Experience Distillationcited by 0
- 2026An Interpretable Approach to PDE Solution Discovery via Structural Experience Distillation8 Oct 2026
- 2025StruSR: Structure-Aware Symbolic Regression with Physics-Informed Taylor Guidance8 Oct 2025
- 2024Concept-driven Off Policy Evaluation28 Nov 2024
- 2024Bridging the Gap: Representation Spaces in Neuro-Symbolic AI7 Nov 2024
- 2024Neuro-Symbolic AI: Explainability, Challenges, and Future Trends7 Nov 2024
- 2024Closed-form Solutions: A New Perspective on Solving Differential Equations23 May 2024