MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Filtering Physics-Informed Neural Operator for Online Hydraulic Transient Teconstruction

2025· preprint· en· W4412609060 on OpenAlexaff
Jiawei Ye, Wei Zeng, Martin F. Lambert, Nhu Cuong

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsTransient (computer programming)Operator (biology)Artificial neural networkComputer sciencePhysicsArtificial intelligenceChemistryProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hydraulic transients pose significant risks to pipeline systems, including potential leaks and bursts. While traditional numerical methods are widely used for transient analysis, their reliance on detailed initial/boundary conditions limits their applicability in real-world scenarios. To overcome these challenges, this paper proposes a novel Filtering Physics-Informed Neural Operator (FPINO) framework for accurate and near real-time reconstruction of hydraulic transients from sparse observations. FPINO extends recent developments in Physics-Informed Neural Operators (PINOs), a class of machine learning models that incorporate physical laws directly into operator learning, to transient hydraulic applications. The FPINO framework introduces a time-weighted information filtering strategy that prioritizes the relevant observations, thereby accelerating convergence and improving prediction accuracy. Additionally, FPINO employs a hybrid loss function that integrates physics-based constraints with data-driven learning, ensuring both physical fidelity and adaptability to complex system behaviors. Numerical and experimental results show that FPINO outperforms the baseline PINO approach in reconstructing diverse transient scenarios. These results highlight the potential of FPINO as a robust and practical tool for real-time monitoring and analysis of hydraulic transients in pipeline systems.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.870
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.221 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207