MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416359542 · doi:10.2514/1.j065798

Block-Structured Operator Inference for Coupled Multiphysics Model Reduction

2025· article· en· W4416359542 on OpenAlexaff
Benjamin G. Zastrow, Anirban Chaudhuri, Karen Willcox, Anthony Ashley, Michael C. Henson

Bibliographic record

VenueAIAA Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicModel Reduction and Neural Networks
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
FundersAir Force Office of Scientific ResearchAdvanced Scientific Computing ResearchLockheed Martin
KeywordsMultiphysicsInferenceOperator (biology)AerodynamicsRobustness (evolution)Surrogate modelSpeedupUncertainty quantificationCurse of dimensionality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a block-structured formulation of Operator Inference as a way to learn structured reduced-order models for multiphysics systems. The approach specifies the governing equation structure for each physics component and the structure of the coupling terms. Once the multiphysics structure is specified, the reduced-order model is learned from snapshot data following the nonintrusive Operator Inference methodology. In addition to preserving physical system structure, which in turn permits preservation of system properties such as stability and second-order structure, the block-structured approach has the advantages of reducing the overall dimensionality of the learning problem and admitting tailored regularization for each physics component. The numerical advantages of the block-structured formulation over a monolithic Operator Inference formulation are demonstrated for aeroelastic analysis, which couples aerodynamic and structural models. For the benchmark test case of the AGARD 445.6 wing, block-structured Operator Inference provides an average 20% online prediction speedup over monolithic Operator Inference across subsonic and supersonic flow conditions in both the stable and fluttering parameter regimes while preserving the accuracy achieved with monolithic Operator Inference.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.582
Threshold uncertainty score0.482

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIAA JournalSame topicModel Reduction and Neural NetworksFrench-language works237,207