> simulation by means of second-kind Galerkin boundary element method.>> Source: Elke Spindler "Second-Kind Single Trace Boundary Integral>> Formulations for Scattering at Composite Objects", ETH Diss 23620, 2016."" > > simulation by means of second-kind Galerkin boundary element method.>> Source: Elke Spindler "Second-Kind Single Trace Boundary Integral>> Formulations for Scattering at Composite Objects", ETH Diss 23620, 2016."" > Research reports – Seminar for Applied Mathematics | ETH Zurich

Research reports

Are Neural Operators Really Neural Operators? Frame Theory Meets Operator Learning

by F. Bartolucci and E. de Bézenac and B. Raonic and R. Molinaro and S. Mishra and R. Alaifari

(Report number 2023-21)

Abstract
Recently, there has been significant interest in operator learning, i.e. learning mappings between infinite-dimensional function spaces. This has been particularly relevant in the context of learning partial differential equations from data. However, it has been observed that proposed models may not behave as operators when implemented on a computer, questioning the very essence of what operator learning should be. We contend that in addition to defining the operator at the continuous level, some form of continuous-discrete equivalence is necessary for an architecture to genuinely learn the underlying operator, rather than just discretizations of it. To this end, we propose to employ frames, a concept in applied harmonic analysis and signal processing that gives rise to exact and stable discrete representations of continuous signals. Extending these concepts to operators, we introduce a unifying mathematical framework of Representation equivalent Neural Operator (ReNO) to ensure operations at the continuous and discrete level are equivalent. Lack of this equivalence is quantified in terms of aliasing errors. We analyze various existing operator learning architectures to determine whether they fall within this framework, and highlight implications when they fail to do so.

Keywords: Operator Learning, Neural Operators, PDEs, Frame theory, Sampling theory

BibTeX
@Techreport{BdRMMA23_1058,
  author = {F. Bartolucci and E. de Bézenac and B. Raonic and R. Molinaro and S. Mishra and R. Alaifari},
  title = {Are Neural Operators Really Neural Operators? Frame Theory Meets Operator Learning},
  institution = {Seminar for Applied Mathematics, ETH Z{\"u}rich},
  number = {2023-21},
  address = {Switzerland},
  url = {https://www.sam.math.ethz.ch/sam_reports/reports_final/reports2023/2023-21.pdf },
  year = {2023}
}

Disclaimer
© Copyright for documents on this server remains with the authors. Copies of these documents made by electronic or mechanical means including information storage and retrieval systems, may only be employed for personal use. The administrators respectfully request that authors inform them when any paper is published to avoid copyright infringement. Note that unauthorised copying of copyright material is illegal and may lead to prosecution. Neither the administrators nor the Seminar for Applied Mathematics (SAM) accept any liability in this respect. The most recent version of a SAM report may differ in formatting and style from published journal version. Do reference the published version if possible (see SAM Publications).

JavaScript has been disabled in your browser