Do Better Scores Mean Better Physics? Physics-Grounded Explanations for Sim2Real Neural Operators

arXiv:2610.00415v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Machine-learning surrogates accelerate physical simulation, but lower prediction error need not coincide with lower error in physically relevant flow statistics. We examine this question for flow around a NACA4418 airfoil using paired computational-fluid-dynamics simulations and experimental particle-image-velocimetry measurements. A mean-preserving input intervention removes velocity fluctuations from selected regions of observed flow histories. Across four neural operators, removing fluctuations from the most energetic 10% of valid observed cells changes forecasts more than equal-area random removal. Because the masks are not matched for removed fluctuation energy, this contrast measures sensitivity, not independent evidence of physical importance. Separately, a CNO has lower velocity-field error but substantially higher two-component fluctuation-energy error than the reference on both analysis subsets. An output attenuation stress test also demonstrates disagreement between benchmark errors and domain-summed fluctuation energy. These single-benchmark results motivate reporting complementary physical diagnostics alongside aggregate prediction scores; they do not establish counterfactual physical correctness.

Related

• Decision-Aware Evaluation of Physics-Informed Surrogates
• Wrong-Physics Backdoors in Neural PDE Operators
• StablePDENet: Enhancing Neural Operator Stability through Physics-Informed Residual-Sensitivity Regularization
• Test-time Generalization for Physics through Neural Operator Splitting

Source: arXiv cs.LG | 2026-10-02