MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410346318 · doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2025.114066

Physics-informed neural networks for tsunami inundation modeling

2025· article· en· W4410346318 on OpenAlexafffund
Rüdiger Brecht, Elsa Dos Santos Cardoso‐Bihlo, Alexander Bihlo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational Physics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSeismology and Earthquake Studies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersScience and Engineering Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsArtificial neural networkPhysicsMeteorologyStatistical physicsComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We use physics-informed neural networks for solving the shallow-water equations for tsunami modeling. Physics-informed neural networks are an optimization based approach for solving differential equations that is completely meshless. This substantially simplifies the modeling of the inundation process of tsunamis. While physics-informed neural networks require retraining for each particular new initial condition of the shallow-water equations, we also introduce the use of deep operator networks that can be trained to learn the solution operator instead of a particular solution only and thus provides substantial speed-ups, also compared to classical numerical approaches for tsunami models. We show with several classical benchmarks that our method can model both tsunami propagation and the inundation process exceptionally well.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations12
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computational PhysicsSame topicSeismology and Earthquake StudiesFrench-language works237,207