mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Operator-Informed Gaussian Processes for Complex Helmholtz Wavefields: From Synthetic Benchmarks to In Vivo Brain Elastography

arXiv 2607.14193 ↗First posted 15 Jul 2026stat.ML cs.LG cs.NAcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The Helmholtz equation governs time-harmonic wave propagation, and in dissipative media a complex modulus renders its squared wavenumber kappa2 complex. Inferring such fields from sparse, noisy data calls for solvers that also quantify their own uncertainty. Physics-informed Gaussian-process (GP) regression supplies this by returning a posterior over the solution, yet operator-conditioned formulations have been developed almost exclusively for real-valued fields. We extend operator-informed GP regression to complex-valued Helmholtz problems by realifying the complex operator into an equivalent coupled real block, which enables inference with standard real-valued GP conditioning. The construction admits a family of priors, from a proper diagonal prior to coregionalized and multiscale variants, and conditions on PDE residuals and boundary traces. On benchmark problems in one to three dimensions, the solver is competitive with finite-difference and neural-network baselines at a far smaller interior-constraint budget. Unlike those deterministic baselines, it returns a posterior over the complex wavefield rather than a point estimate. Applied to textitin vivo brain magnetic resonance elastography, a proper multiscale prior reconstructs the shear curl field to a correlation of 0.77 with measurement, above a 0.75 target. The gain arises from the multiscale kernel rather than from real--imaginary coupling. We further identify a low-frequency accuracy ceiling set by model mismatch and a posterior uncertainty that is not yet calibrated. Calibrated uncertainty therefore emerges as the central next step for probabilistic wavefield inference in dissipative media.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 55 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Jul 2026.

Builds on

14 of 55 references.

References · 14

  1. 2019DeepXDE: A deep learning library for solving differential equationscited by 619
  2. 2022Scientific Machine Learning through Physics-Informed Neural Networks: Where we are and What's nextcited by 608
  3. 2021Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) for fluid mechanics: A reviewcited by 473
  4. 2020B-PINNs: Bayesian Physics-Informed Neural Networks for Forward and Inverse PDE Problems with Noisy Datacited by 335
  5. 2020hp-VPINNs: Variational Physics-Informed Neural Networks With Domain Decompositioncited by 236
  6. 2015Probabilistic Numerics and Uncertainty in Computationscited by 60
  7. 2022Bayesian Physics-Informed Neural Networks for real-world nonlinear dynamical systemscited by 54
  8. 2022Physics-Informed Gaussian Process Regression Generalizes Linear PDE Solverscited by 41
  9. 2023Uncertainty quantification for noisy inputs-outputs in physics-informed neural networks and neural operatorscited by 28
  10. 2017Probabilistic Numerical Methods for PDE-constrained Bayesian Inverse Problemscited by 20
  11. 2020Gaussian Process Regression constrained by Boundary Value Problemscited by 15
  12. 2015Complex-Valued Gaussian Processes for Regressioncited by 4
2 more
  1. 2016Complex-valued Gaussian Process Regression for Time Series Analysiscited by 3
  2. 2021Data-driven Uncertainty Quantification in Computational Human Head Modelscited by 3

Built on by

Not cited yet.