mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Operator Boosting Produces Pareto-Efficient PDE Surrogates

arXiv 2606.17460 ↗First posted 16 Jun 2026cs.LG cs.NA math.NAcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Neural operators are widely used as surrogate solution maps for partial differential equations (PDEs), but full-size models can be costly to store, deploy, and evaluate in many-query scientific workflows. This work introduces Operator Boosting, a stagewise residual-learning framework for constructing compact neural-operator surrogates directly, rather than training a large model and compressing it afterward. Starting from the empirical mean predictor in normalized output coordinates, the method trains a sequence of tiny same-family neural operators on residual fields and incorporates each correction through validation-selected shrinkage. We instantiate the framework with Fourier neural operators (FNOs), DeepONets, and convolutional neural operators (CNOs), and compare boosted tiny stacks against full-size monolithic baselines across one-, two-, and three-dimensional PDE benchmarks from PDEBench, APEBench, and The Well. Across 30 dataset-architecture pairs, 21 show positive mean accuracy gains and 17 have positive confidence intervals, while all boosted stacks reduce trainable parameter count by approximately 72-95%. Best-model comparisons show empirical Pareto improvements on 7 of 10 completed PDE benchmarks, including two-dimensional Navier-Stokes, shallow-water dynamics, Darcy flow, one-dimensional transport and reaction systems, and three-dimensional compressible Navier-Stokes. These results show that Operator Boosting often improves the empirical accuracy-parameter Pareto frontier of neural PDE surrogates, while also exposing PDE- and architecture-dependent regimes where residual boosting fails to offset compression.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Jun 2026.

Builds on

18 of 33 references.

References · 18

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 52,096
  2. 2015Distilling the Knowledge in a Neural Networkcited by 10,324
  3. 2016Simple and Scalable Predictive Uncertainty Estimation using Deep Ensemblescited by 3,926
  4. 2020Fourier Neural Operator for Parametric Partial Differential Equationscited by 2,908
  5. 2015Deep Compression: Compressing Deep Neural Networks with Pruning, Trained Quantization and Huffman Codingcited by 2,329
  6. 2018The Lottery Ticket Hypothesis: Finding Sparse, Trainable Neural Networkscited by 2,262
  7. 2019DeepONet: Learning nonlinear operators for identifying differential equations based on the universal approximation theorem of operatorscited by 2,018
  8. 2020Neural Operator: Graph Kernel Network for Partial Differential Equationscited by 734
  9. 2022Fourier Neural Operator with Learned Deformations for PDEs on General Geometriescited by 427
  10. 2022PDEBENCH: An Extensive Benchmark for Scientific Machine Learningcited by 413
  11. 2023Convolutional Neural Operators for robust and accurate learning of PDEscited by 214
  12. 2024APEBench: A Benchmark for Autoregressive Neural Emulators of PDEscited by 60
6 more
  1. 2024Toward a Better Understanding of Fourier Neural Operators from a Spectral Perspectivecited by 25
  2. 2023Guaranteed Approximation Bounds for Mixed-Precision Neural Operatorscited by 9
  3. 2026Diagnosing Failure Modes of Neural Operators Across Diverse PDE Familiescited by 6
  4. 2026One Operator to Rule Them All? On Boundary-Indexed Operator Families in Neural PDE Solverscited by 5
  5. 2026Real-Time Sensing of Inaccessible Physical Fields via an Edge-Deployable Hardware-Portable Graph Neural Operatorcited by 4
  6. 2025Tensor-Compressed and Fully-Quantized Training of Neural PDE Solverscited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.