# Comparing Physics-Informed and Neural ODE Approaches for Modeling Nonlinear Biological Systems: A Case Study Based on the Morris-Lecar Model

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.26921 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.26921/

## Key facts

- Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 9 of its 25 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 27 Mar 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 9 of 9)

- [PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Library](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.01703/) (2019)
- [Neural Ordinary Differential Equations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1806.07366/) (2018)
- [Fourier Neural Operator for Parametric Partial Differential Equations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.08895/) (2020)
- [DeepONet: Learning nonlinear operators for identifying differential equations based on the universal approximation theorem of operators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.03193/) (2019)
- [When and why PINNs fail to train: A neural tangent kernel perspective](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2007.14527/) (2020)
- [Neural Controlled Differential Equations for Irregular Time Series](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.08926/) (2020)
- [Augmented Neural ODEs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.01681/) (2019)
- [Universal Differential Equations for Scientific Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.04385/) (2020)
- [Analytical solution of linearized equations of the Morris-Lecar neuron model at large constant stimulation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.04083/) (2019)

## Built on by (most cited first, 3 of 3)

- [Activation Saturation and Floquet Spectrum Collapse in Neural ODEs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.00543/) (2026)
- [Learning Hybrid Biophysical Neuron Models with Neural ODEs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.16693/) (2026)
- [Physics-Informed Neural Networks for Discovering Periodic Orbits in the Gravitational Three-Body Problem](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.23501/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Physics-Informed Neural Networks (PINNs) and Neural Ordinary Differential Equations (NODEs) represent two distinct machine learning frameworks for modeling nonlinear neuronal dynamics. This study systematically evaluates their performance on the two-dimensional Morris-Lecar model across three canonical bifurcation regimes: Hopf, Saddle-Node on Limit Cycle, and homoclinic orbit. Synthetic time-series data are generated via numerical integration under controlled conditions, and training is performed using collocation points for PINNs and adaptive solvers for NODEs (Dormand-Prince method). PINNs incorporate the governing differential equations into the loss function using automatic differentiation, which enforces physical consistency during training. In contrast, NODEs learn the system's vector field directly from data, without prior structural assumptions or inductive bias toward physical laws. Model performance is assessed using standard regression metrics, including Mean Squared Error (MSE), Mean Absolute Error (MAE), Mean Absolute Percentage Error (MAPE), and the coefficient of determination. Results indicate that PINNs tend to achieve higher accuracy and robustness in scenarios involving stiffness or sensitive bifurcations, owing to their embedded physical structure. NODEs, while more expressive and flexible, operate as black-box approximators without structural constraints, which can lead to reduced interpretability and stability in these regimes. Although advanced variants of NODEs (e.g., ANODEs, latent NODEs) aim to mitigate such limitations, their performance under stiff dynamics remains an open question. These findings emphasize the trade-offs between physics-informed models, which embed structure and interpretability, and purely data-driven approaches, which prioritize flexibility at the cost of physical consistency.