A Benchmarking Study for Algorithm Selection in Scientific Machine Learning (SciML): PINN vs. gPINN for Solving Partial Differential Equations

Recent advances in physics-informed neural networks (PINN) have highlighted the need for systematic criteria for selecting appropriate algorithms to solve differential equations. This paper presents a numerical comparison between standard PINNs and gradient-enhanced PINNs (gPINNs) used to solve a high-order partial differential equations (PDE). To verify the accuracy and convergence behavior of all the methods, we solve a fourth-order PDE whose analytical solution is known. gPINN is recommended for problems requiring high accuracy in gradient fields or operating with sparse data, whereas standard PINN is advised for strongly nonlinear or computationally constrained scenarios. We synthesize our findings into a practical selection guide; gPINN is recommended for problems requiring high accuracy in gradient fields or operating with sparse data, whereas standard PINN is advised for strongly nonlinear or computationally constrained scenarios. This framework provides a clear, evidence-based policy for algorithm choice in SciML. Beyond numerical comparison, we provide an analytical interpretation linking solver performance to the spectral and stiffness properties of each PDE class, offering a principled basis for algorithm selection.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
AppliedMath
Published
2026-02-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/appliedmath6020026
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Model Reduction and Neural Networks
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
36.90
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Benchmarking Study for Algorithm Selection in Scientific Machine Learning (SciML): PINN vs. gPINN for Solving Partial Differential Equations

Kaleem Arshid, Muhammad Azam, Muhammad Shafiq Ahmed, Imran Shabir Chuhan
1 citations
AppliedMath
Model Reduction and Neural Networks
36.90
article

A Benchmarking Study for Algorithm Selection in Scientific Machine Learning (SciML): PINN vs. gPINN for Solving Partial Differential Equations

Kaleem Arshid, Muhammad Azam, Muhammad Shafiq Ahmed, Imran Shabir Chuhan
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Recent advances in physics-informed neural networks (PINN) have highlighted the need for systematic criteria for selecting appropriate algorithms to solve differential equations. This paper presents a numerical comparison between standard PINNs and gradient-enhanced PINNs (gPINNs) used to solve a high-order partial differential equations (PDE). To verify the accuracy and convergence behavior of all the methods, we solve a fourth-order PDE whose analytical solution is known. gPINN is recommended for problems requiring high accuracy in gradient fields or operating with sparse data, whereas standard PINN is advised for strongly nonlinear or computationally constrained scenarios. We synthesize our findings into a practical selection guide; gPINN is recommended for problems requiring high accuracy in gradient fields or operating with sparse data, whereas standard PINN is advised for strongly nonlinear or computationally constrained scenarios. This framework provides a clear, evidence-based policy for algorithm choice in SciML. Beyond numerical comparison, we provide an analytical interpretation linking solver performance to the spectral and stiffness properties of each PDE class, offering a principled basis for algorithm selection.

AppliedMathVol. 6(2)
Beijing University of Technology (CN), American University of Ras Al Khaimah (AE), University of Genoa (IT), South China University of Technology (CN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Model Reduction and Neural Networks
36.90
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.