PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 14, 2026Neurocomputing10 citationsOpen Access

Physics-informed neural networks for differential equation solutions: A comprehensive review

View Full Paper
SKSubarna KhanraSant Longowal Institute of Engineering and TechnologyVKVijay Kumar KukrejaSant Longowal Institute of Engineering and TechnologyIBIndu BalaThe University of Adelaide

Key Points

  • The aim is to review and consolidate the theoretical and methodological aspects of physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) for solving differential equations.
  • Review theoretical foundations including expressiveness and automatic differentiation.
  • Survey core methods such as loss design, constraint enforcement, and optimization.
  • Propose a unified benchmarking framework for standard PDE tasks and metrics.
  • Identify PINNs as effective for solving inverse problems and data assimilation.
  • Highlight the importance of architectural and training choices based on application needs.
  • Document challenges like scalability and reproducibility in the use of PINNs.

Abstract

Physics-Informed Neural Networks (PINNs) embed governing differential equations into training, enabling solutions of ODEs and PDEs. This review consolidates theoretical foundations (expressive capacity, automatic differentiation) and core methods (loss design, constraint enforcement, sampling, optimization), while surveying applications from baseline PINNs to advanced variants such as multi-physics coupling, domain decomposition, frequency-enhanced representations, and operator-learning hybrids. Comparative synthesis links architectural and training choices to equation type, data conditions, and computational budgets. A unified benchmarking framework is proposed with standard PDE tasks, accuracy metrics, collocation budgets, and transparent reporting for fair comparison with classical solvers. Evidence positions PINNs as complementary to traditional methods-effective for inverse problems, data assimilation, irregular domains, and parametric inference-while challenges remain in scalability, spectral bias, constraint enforcement, and reproducibility. The review offers a coherent synthesis with actionable guidance for scientific and engineering applications.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Khanra et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69b4fb8db39f7826a300bc20https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2026.133317
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Fractional Time-Varying Autoregressive Modeling: Parallel GAM and PINN Approaches to Dynamic Volatility Forecasting2025 · 2 citations
  2. 2Deep learning for spatiotemporal forecasting in Earth system science: a review2024 · 61 citations
  3. 3Scientific Machine Learning Through Physics–Informed Neural Networks: Where we are and What’s Next2022 · 2,666 citations
  4. 4Physics-informed neural networks for PDE problems: a comprehensive review2025 · 182 citations
  5. 5Physics-informed neural networks with trainable sinusoidal activation functions for approximating the solutions of the Navier-Stokes equations2025 · 14 citations