A Unified Approach with Physics-Informed Neural Networks (PINNs) and the Homotopy Analysis Method (HAM) for Precise Approximate Solutions to Nonlinear PDEs: A Study of Burgers, Huxley, Fisher and Their Coupled Form

This study presents a systematic comparative benchmark between two distinct paradigms for solving nonlinear partial differential equations (PDEs): the data-driven Physics-Informed Neural Networks (PINNs) and the analytical Homotopy Analysis Method (HAM). We apply both methods to a unified family of canonical PDEs, the Burgers, Huxley, Fisher, Burgers–Huxley, and Burgers–Fisher equations, under identical problem setups, domain discretization, and validation metrics. PINNs incorporate physical laws directly into neural network training by minimizing a loss function that enforces PDE residuals, yielding physically consistent solutions even for strongly nonlinear problems. HAM provides approximate analytical solutions using a unified framework, and the same initial guess, auxiliary linear operator, and auxiliary function across all equations despite their distinct nonlinearities. The controlled, consistent application of both methods enables a fair, reproducible comparison across this equation family. The results provide a quantitative performance map under identical conditions, delineating when PINNs (high accuracy, long-term stability, and generalization capability) are preferable, versus when HAM (computational speed, short-term analytic approximation, and lower memory footprint) offers advantages. While the finite radius of convergence of the truncated HAM series is theoretically expected, our controlled comparison quantifies for the first time how this degradation varies across equation types, revealing that the choice between methods depends on specific problem requirements including error tolerance, available computational resources, and temporal horizon. The novelty lies not in solving each equation individually, but in deriving a performance taxonomy that systematically connects equation features (shocks, stiffness, and reaction–diffusion coupling) to optimal solver choice—providing previously unavailable, evidence-based guidance for the scientific computing community. This study establishes the first rigorous, controlled comparative benchmark between analytic and data-driven PDE solvers across a spectrum of nonlinearities, providing a reproducible baseline for future hybrid scientific machine learning solvers.