Abishek Thangamuthu

dblp:333/1054 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2022
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Graph learning · 67% Representation and self-supervised learning · 33%
Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Computational science and engineering · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Graph learning
graph neural network
0.612022
Unravelling the Performance of Physics-informed Graph Neural Networks for Dynamical Systems · NeurIPS 2022
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning
inductive biases
0.612022
Unravelling the Performance of Physics-informed Graph Neural Networks for Dynamical Systems · NeurIPS 2022
Machine learning › Graph learning › graph neural network › graph neural network architecture
physics-informed graph neural networks
0.612022
Unravelling the Performance of Physics-informed Graph Neural Networks for Dynamical Systems · NeurIPS 2022
Computational science and engineering › dynamical systems
dynamical system simulation
0.612022
Unravelling the Performance of Physics-informed Graph Neural Networks for Dynamical Systems · NeurIPS 2022

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

neural ODE · 1.1lagrangian neural networks · 1.1hamiltonian neural network · 1.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2022 Unravelling the Performance of Physics-informed Graph Neural Networks for Dynamical Systems
abstract
Recently, graph neural networks have been gaining a lot of attention to simulate dynamical systems due to their inductive nature leading to zero-shot generalizability. Similarly, physics-informed inductive biases in deep-learning frameworks have been shown to give superior performance in learning the dynamics of physical systems. There is a growing volume of literature that attempts to combine these two approaches. Here, we evaluate the performance of thirteen different graph neural networks, namely, Hamiltonian and Lagrangian graph neural networks, graph neural ODE, and their variants with explicit constraints and different architectures. We briefly explain the theoretical formulation highlighting the similarities and differences in the inductive biases and graph architecture of these systems. Then, we evaluate them on spring, pendulum, and gravitational and 3D deformable solid systems to compare the performance in terms of rollout error, conserved quantities such as energy and momentum, and generalizability to unseen system sizes. Our study demonstrates that GNNs with additional inductive biases, such as explicit constraints and decoupling of kinetic and potential energies, exhibit significantly enhanced performance. Further, all the physics-informed GNNs exhibit zero-shot generalizability to system sizes an order of magnitude larger than the training system, thus providing a promising route to simulate large-scale realistic systems.
Abishek Thangamuthu, Gunjan Kumar, Suresh Bishnoi, Ravinder Bhattoo, N. M. Anoop Krishnan, Sayan Ranu
NeurIPS1