mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Do physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) need to be deep? Shallow PINNs using the Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm

arXiv 2602.08515 ↗First posted 9 Feb 2026math.NA cs.LG cs.NAcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

This work investigates shallow physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) for solving forward and inverse problems governed by nonlinear partial differential equations (PDEs). By formulating PINN training as a nonlinear least-squares problem, the Levenberg-Marquardt (LM) algorithm is used to efficiently optimize the network parameters. Exact analytical expressions for neural-network derivatives with respect to the input variables are derived, revealing the relationships between the network output and its spatial and temporal derivatives and providing a clearer interpretation of the PINN architecture. These expressions are then used to derive explicit formulas for the Jacobian matrix required by LM. The proposed approach is evaluated on the Burgers, Schr"odinger, Allen-Cahn, and three-dimensional Bratu equations. Numerical results show that LM substantially outperforms BFGS, L-BFGS, and Adam in convergence speed, accuracy, and final loss values. Comparisons with deeper networks further demonstrate that shallow LM-PINNs can achieve higher accuracy with substantially fewer parameters, emphasizing the importance of considering network architecture and optimization strategy jointly. The explicit analytical Jacobian also provides computational and memory advantages that are particularly relevant to large-scale PINNs. Overall, these results suggest that, for a broad class of PDEs, shallow PINNs combined with effective second-order optimization can provide accurate and computationally efficient solutions to both forward and inverse problems.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 41 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Feb 2026.

Builds on

14 of 41 references.

References · 14

  1. 2020Fourier Neural Operator for Parametric Partial Differential Equationscited by 2,806
  2. 2019DeepONet: Learning nonlinear operators for identifying differential equations based on the universal approximation theorem of operatorscited by 1,965
  3. 2015Automatic differentiation in machine learning: a surveycited by 846
  4. 2022Scientific Machine Learning through Physics-Informed Neural Networks: Where we are and What's nextcited by 603
  5. 2017Solving high-dimensional partial differential equations using deep learningcited by 549
  6. 2020On the eigenvector bias of Fourier feature networks: From regression to solving multi-scale PDEs with physics-informed neural networkscited by 279
  7. 2019Physics Informed Extreme Learning Machine (PIELM) -- A rapid method for the numerical solution of partial differential equationscited by 66
  8. 2025Optimizing the Optimizer for Physics-Informed Neural Networks and Kolmogorov-Arnold Networkscited by 41
  9. 2021SPINN: Sparse, Physics-based, and partially Interpretable Neural Networks for PDEscited by 32
  10. 2022Parsimonious Physics-Informed Random Projection Neural Networks for Initial-Value Problems of ODEs and index-1 DAEscited by 19
  11. 2022Physics-informed ConvNet: Learning Physical Field from a Shallow Neural Networkcited by 5
  12. 2024Neural networks for bifurcation and linear stability analysis of steady states in partial differential equationscited by 5
2 more
  1. 2022Optimizing the optimizer for data driven deep neural networks and physics informed neural networkscited by 4
  2. 2024A finite difference method with symmetry properties for the high-dimensional Bratu equationcited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.

2 papers.