mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Guarantees by Construction for Learned Finite Volume Schemes on Steady Supersonic Flow

arXiv 2607.20171 ↗First posted 22 Jul 2026physics.flu-dyn cs.LG cs.NAcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

A second order finite volume scheme rests on two local quantities: a gradient reconstructed in each cell, and a limiter which scales it down where the reconstruction would overshoot. Both are set by fixed formulas, and on coarse unstructured meshes a small network can supply better values. But a network is free to output anything, and the usual safeguard is a penalty in the training loss, which discourages inadmissible states without preventing them. We replace the penalty by a hard constraint. The network still sets both quantities, and every value it can produce lies inside safe bounds: its stencil weights cannot cancel a neighbour, and its limiter is capped by the local flow. The flux, the wall treatment and the time step are not learned and carry their own guarantees. Admissibility therefore holds for every value of the weights rather than as an outcome of training, and no negative density or pressure occurred in any computation reported here. Because the scheme is safe whatever the network does, we could ask what the network contributes. We test it on supersonic channel flow over an obstacle, including the forward facing step of Woodward and Colella. Learning lowers the error by 38% on an unseen geometry and 29% on an unseen obstacle topology, measured against the same scheme with the network switched off. The method aims at the accuracy of a fine mesh for the cost of a coarse one, and refining once improves the error fourfold while multiplying the run time by eight. Learning secures half of this improvement for a sixth of this time. All of this comes from one of the two quantities the network sets. The gradient reconstruction reproduces the full effect on its own, and the limiter accounts for about a tenth as much. This also explains why the gain fades beyond the Mach numbers the weights were trained on.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 7 of its 24 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 Jul 2026.

Builds on

7 of 24 references.

References · 7

  1. 2021Machine learning accelerated computational fluid dynamicscited by 461
  2. 2020Solver-in-the-Loop: Learning from Differentiable Physics to Interact with Iterative PDE-Solverscited by 201
  3. 2018Deep Learning Methods for Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes Simulations of Airfoil Flowscited by 147
  4. 2024Differentiability in Unrolled Training of Neural Physics Simulators on Transient Dynamicscited by 25
  5. 2024A data-driven learned discretization approach in finite volume schemes for hyperbolic conservation laws and varying boundary conditionscited by 5
  6. 2025Data-Driven Adaptive Gradient Recovery for Unstructured Finite Volume Computationscited by 2
  7. 2022Learning Similarity Metrics for Volumetric Simulations with Multiscale CNNscited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.