mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Symmetry-Constrained Language-Guided Program Synthesis for Discovering Governing Equations from Noisy and Partial Observations

arXiv 2603.06869 ↗First posted 6 Mar 2026cs.AI cs.CL cs.LGcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Discovering compact governing equations from experimental observations is one of the defining objectives of quantitative science, yet practical discovery pipelines routinely fail when measurements are noisy, relevant state variables are unobserved, or multiple symbolic structures explain the data equally well within statistical uncertainty. Here we introduce SymLang (Symmetry-constrained Language-guided equation discovery), a unified framework that brings together three previously separate ideas: (i) typed symmetry-constrained grammars that encode dimensional analysis, group-theoretic invariance, and parity constraints as hard production rules, eliminating on average 71.3% of candidate expression trees before any fitting; (ii) language-model-guided program synthesis in which a fine-tuned 7B-parameter proposer, conditioned on interpretable data descriptors, efficiently navigates the constrained search space; and (iii) MDL-regularized Bayesian model selection coupled with block-bootstrap stability analysis that quantifies structural uncertainty rather than committing to a single best equation. Across 133 dynamical systems spanning classical mechanics, electrodynamics, thermodynamics, population dynamics, and nonlinear oscillators, SymLang achieves an exact structural recovery rate of 83.7% under 10% observational noise - a 22.4 percentage-point improvement over the next-best baseline - while reducing out-of-distribution extrapolation error by 61% and near-eliminating conservation-law violations (3.1 x 10-3 vs. 187.3 x 10-3 physical drift for the closest competitor). In all tested regimes the framework correctly identifies structural degeneracy, reporting it explicitly rather than returning a confidently wrong single equation. The framework is fully open-source and reproducible, providing a principled pathway from raw data to interpretable, physically auditable symbolic laws.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 58 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Mar 2026.

Builds on

19 of 58 references.

References · 19

  1. 2018Neural Ordinary Differential Equationscited by 3,733
  2. 2016Group Equivariant Convolutional Networkscited by 1,154
  3. 2019Hamiltonian Neural Networkscited by 702
  4. 2019AI Feynman: a Physics-Inspired Method for Symbolic Regressioncited by 536
  5. 2020Lagrangian Neural Networkscited by 388
  6. 2020Universal Differential Equations for Scientific Machine Learningcited by 345
  7. 2021Contemporary Symbolic Regression Methods and their Relative Performancecited by 209
  8. 2022End-to-end symbolic regression with transformerscited by 195
  9. 2021Neural Symbolic Regression that Scalescited by 185
  10. 2020Weak SINDy For Partial Differential Equationscited by 154
  11. 2018Learning Equations for Extrapolation and Controlcited by 151
  12. 2021Geometric Deep Learning on Molecular Representationscited by 113
7 more
  1. 2019Integration of Neural Network-Based Symbolic Regression in Deep Learning for Scientific Discoverycited by 93
  2. 2019Bayesian Symbolic Regressioncited by 77
  3. 2023Transformer-based Planning for Symbolic Regressioncited by 72
  4. 2018Where are we now? A large benchmark study of recent symbolic regression methodscited by 44
  5. 2020Hamiltonian neural networks for solving equations of motioncited by 33
  6. 2023Deep Generative Symbolic Regressioncited by 27
  7. 2022AI Poincar'e 2.0: Machine Learning Conservation Laws from Differential Equationscited by 20

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.