MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410619129 · doi:10.1142/s0219530525500307

Deep operator network approximation rates for Lipschitz operators

2025· article· en· W4410619129 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnalysis and Applications · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicNumerical methods in inverse problems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
KeywordsMathematicsLipschitz continuityOperator (biology)Lipschitz domainMathematical analysisApplied mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We establish a framework for universality and expression rate bounds for a class of neural Deep Operator Networks (DONs) emulating Lipschitz (or Hölder) continuous maps [Formula: see text] between (subsets of) separable Hilbert spaces [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text]. The DON architecture considered uses linear encoders [Formula: see text] and decoders [Formula: see text] via (biorthogonal) Riesz bases of [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text], and an approximator network of an infinite-dimensional, parametric coordinate map that is Lipschitz continuous on the sequence space [Formula: see text]. Unlike previous works [L. Herrmann, C. Schwab and J. Zech, Neural and spectral operator surrogates: Construction and expression rate bounds, Adv. Comput. Math. 50(4) (2024) 72; C. Marcati and C. Schwab, Exponential convergence of deep operator networks for elliptic partial differential equations, SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 61(3) (2023) 1513–1545] which required for example [Formula: see text] to be holomorphic, the present expression rate results require mere Lipschitz (or Hölder) continuity of [Formula: see text]. Key in the proof of the present expression rate bounds is the use of either superexpressive activations (e.g., [Z. Shen, H. Yang and S. Zhang, Neural network approximation: Three hidden layers are enough, Neural Netw. 141 (2021) 160–173; Z. Shen, H. Yang and S. Zhang, Deep network approximation: Achieving arbitrary accuracy with fixed number of neurons, J. Mach. Learn. Res. 23(276) (2022) 1–60; D. Yarotsky, Elementary superexpressive activations, in Proc. 38th Int. Conf. Machine Learning (PMLR, 2021), pp. 11932–11940] and the references there) which are inspired by the Kolmogorov superposition theorem ([A. N. Kolmogorov, On the representation of continuous functions of many variables by superposition of continuous functions of one variable and addition, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 114 (1957) 953–956] or [G. G. Lorentz, Approximation of Functions (Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York–Chicago, IL–Toronto, ON, 1966), Chap. 11] for a comprehensive exposition), or of nonstandard NN architectures with standard (ReLU) activations as recently proposed in [Z. Shen, H. Yang and S. Zhang, Deep network approximation: Achieving arbitrary accuracy with fixed number of neurons, J. Mach. Learn. Res. 23(276) (2022) 1–60; S. Zhang, Z. Shen and H. Yang, Neural network architecture beyond width and depth, in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, Vol. 35 (Curran Associates, 2022), pp. 5669–5681]. We illustrate the abstract results by approximation rate bounds for emulation of (a) solution operators for parametric elliptic variational inequalities and (b) Lipschitz maps of Hilbert–Schmidt operators.

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.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score0.393

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.349 · 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