Skip to content

Adapting neural operators for mechanics decisions under changing operating conditions

Sep 2026 · 0 citations · 37 references
Computer Science Mathematics

Abstract

Neural operators can accelerate repeated nonlinear mechanics calculations, but their accuracy can deteriorate as operating conditions move beyond the training range. This work studies whether high-fidelity solutions acquired during use can be reused to adapt a neural operator and improve subsequent mechanics-based command selection. Two hard-magnetic soft-material systems are simulated using high-fidelity finite-element (FE) models, providing reference solutions for evaluating surrogate predictions and selected commands. A neural operator predicts deformation from known material, loading, and magnetic-field inputs, while an empirical error estimator determines which predictions may be used for command selection. Selected FE evaluations supplement these predictions, and their complete loading paths are retained for periodic updates of the neural operator and estimator. In both examples, the fixed operator loses substantial accuracy when stiffness and loading move outside the training range. Updates using 16 acquired paths recover much of the lost accuracy while preserving accuracy in the nominal regime. Under the same FE evaluation budget, the updated operators also improve command selection, although the benefit varies with the operating condition. Error estimation is less consistent, with inaccurate predictions sometimes accepted and accurate predictions rejected. These results demonstrate that reusing high-fidelity loading paths can extend the useful operating range of a neural operator. However, improved forward accuracy alone does not guarantee reliable prediction acceptance, highlighting prediction-specific error assessment as a separate requirement for trustworthy decision making.

View source

Similar papers

#machine learning Review Open access Oct 2014

Software development in startup companies: A systematic mapping study

The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.

Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al. · 394 citations · ⚡54

Diffusion models as plug-and-play priors

The possibility of inferring high-dimensional data inference in a model that consists of a prior and an auxiliary differentiable constraint given some additional information is considered, thereby allowing a range of potential applications in adapting models to new domains and tasks.

Alexandros Graikos, Esmeralda S. Whitammer, N. Jojic et al. · 316 citations · ⚡15

Trajectory Balance: Improved Credit Assignment in GFlowNets

It is proved that any global minimizer of the trajectory balance objective can define a policy that samples exactly from the target distribution, and empirically demonstrate the benefits of the trajectories balance objective for GFlowNet convergence, diversity of generated samples, and robustness to long action sequenc...

Esmeralda S. Whitammer, Moksh Jain, Emmanuel Bengio et al. · 302 citations · ⚡60

KTO: Model Alignment as Prospect Theoretic Optimization

This work proposes a HALO that directly maximizes the utility of generations instead of maximizing the log-likelihood of preferences, and suggests that the best loss depends on the inductive biases most appropriate for a given setting, an oft-overlooked consideration.

Kawin Ethayarajh, Winnie Xu, Niklas Muennighoff et al. · 195 citations · ⚡28
#machine learning Review Open access Jun 2014

Why Early-Stage Software Startups Fail: A Behavioral Framework

This state-of-practice investigation was performed using a literature review followed by a multiple-case study approach and presents how inconsistency between managerial strategies and execution can lead to failure by means of a behavioral framework.

Carmine Giardino, Xiaofeng Wang, P. Abrahamsson · 175 citations · ⚡19

Related blog posts

MIT News · Artificial Intelligence Oct 23, 2026

Q&A: How AI came to model the “messy” human mind

Assistant Professor Benjamin Lindquist studies how engineers deliberately injected randomness into early AI, giving rise to deep-learning models that sometimes hallucinate.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.