MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393148340 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v38i6.28349

Neural Physical Simulation with Multi-Resolution Hash Grid Encoding

2024· article· en· W4393148340 on OpenAlexaff
Haoxiang Wang, Changyuan Yu, Tianwei Yang, Hui Qiao, Qionghai Dai

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationTsinghua UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceHash functionEncoding (memory)GridResolution (logic)Hash tableParallel computingArtificial intelligenceProgramming languageMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We explore the generalization of the implicit representation in the physical simulation task. Traditional time-dependent partial differential equations (PDEs) solvers for physical simulation often adopt the grid or mesh for spatial discretization, which is memory-consuming for high resolution and lack of adaptivity. Many implicit representations like local extreme machine or Siren are proposed but they are still too compact to suffer from limited accuracy in handling local details and a long time of convergence. We contribute a neural simulation framework based on multi-resolution hash grid representation to introduce hierarchical consideration of global and local information, simultaneously. Furthermore, we propose two key strategies: 1) a numerical gradient method for computing high-order derivatives with boundary conditions; 2) a range analysis sample method for fast neural geometry boundary sampling with dynamic topologies. Our method shows much higher accuracy and strong flexibility for various simulation problems: e.g., large elastic deformations, complex fluid dynamics, and multi-scale phenomena which remain challenging for existing neural physical solvers.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.877
Threshold uncertainty score0.547

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.099
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207