Table of Contents
Fetching ...

Translation Invariance of Neural Operators for the FitzHugh-Nagumo Model

Luca Pellegrini

Abstract

Neural Operators (NOs) are a powerful deep learning framework designed to learn the solution operator that arise from partial differential equations. This study investigates NOs ability to capture the stiff spatio-temporal dynamics of the FitzHugh-Nagumo model, which describes excitable cells. A key contribution of this work is evaluating the translation invariance using a novel training strategy. NOs are trained using an applied current with varying spatial locations and intensities at a fixed time, and the test set introduces a more challenging out-of-distribution scenario in which the applied current is translated in both time and space. This approach significantly reduces the computational cost of dataset generation. Moreover we benchmark seven NOs architectures: Convolutional Neural Operators (CNOs), Deep Operator Networks (DONs), DONs with CNN encoder (DONs-CNN), Proper Orthogonal Decomposition DONs (POD-DONs), Fourier Neural Operators (FNOs), Tucker Tensorized FNOs (TFNOs), Localized Neural Operators (LocalNOs). We evaluated these models based on training and test accuracy, efficiency, and inference speed. Our results reveal that CNOs performs well on translated test dynamics. However, they require higher training costs, though their performance on the training set is similar to that of the other considered architectures. In contrast, FNOs achieve the lowest training error, but have the highest inference time. Regarding the translated dynamics, FNOs and their variants provide less accurate predictions. Finally, DONs and their variants demonstrate high efficiency in both training and inference, however they do not generalize well to the test set. These findings highlight the current capabilities and limitations of NOs in capturing complex ionic model dynamics and provide a comprehensive benchmark including their application to scenarios involving translated dynamics.

Translation Invariance of Neural Operators for the FitzHugh-Nagumo Model

Abstract

Neural Operators (NOs) are a powerful deep learning framework designed to learn the solution operator that arise from partial differential equations. This study investigates NOs ability to capture the stiff spatio-temporal dynamics of the FitzHugh-Nagumo model, which describes excitable cells. A key contribution of this work is evaluating the translation invariance using a novel training strategy. NOs are trained using an applied current with varying spatial locations and intensities at a fixed time, and the test set introduces a more challenging out-of-distribution scenario in which the applied current is translated in both time and space. This approach significantly reduces the computational cost of dataset generation. Moreover we benchmark seven NOs architectures: Convolutional Neural Operators (CNOs), Deep Operator Networks (DONs), DONs with CNN encoder (DONs-CNN), Proper Orthogonal Decomposition DONs (POD-DONs), Fourier Neural Operators (FNOs), Tucker Tensorized FNOs (TFNOs), Localized Neural Operators (LocalNOs). We evaluated these models based on training and test accuracy, efficiency, and inference speed. Our results reveal that CNOs performs well on translated test dynamics. However, they require higher training costs, though their performance on the training set is similar to that of the other considered architectures. In contrast, FNOs achieve the lowest training error, but have the highest inference time. Regarding the translated dynamics, FNOs and their variants provide less accurate predictions. Finally, DONs and their variants demonstrate high efficiency in both training and inference, however they do not generalize well to the test set. These findings highlight the current capabilities and limitations of NOs in capturing complex ionic model dynamics and provide a comprehensive benchmark including their application to scenarios involving translated dynamics.
Paper Structure (27 sections, 19 equations, 24 figures, 10 tables)

This paper contains 27 sections, 19 equations, 24 figures, 10 tables.

Figures (24)

  • Figure 1: Example of translation invariance of the FHN model. Each column shows the evolution of the voltage V (second row) and the recovery variable w (third row) in response to an applied current $I_{app}$\ref{['eq:applied_current']} (first row), with an intensity of $i=3$, a duration of 1 ms, and spatial width 0.04 at 0.5. The stimulus $I_{app}$ is applied at three different times: 5 ms (first column), 35 ms (second column), and 25 ms (third column). These results were obtained using the Firedrake finite element library FiredrakeUserManual.
  • Figure 2: Examples from the training dataset for the FHN model. Each column illustrates the evolution of the voltage V (second row) and the recovery variable w (third row) in response to an applied current $I_{app}$\ref{['eq:applied_current']} (first row). In particular, the first column has an intensity $i=3$ at position 0.1, the second column has intensity of $i=0.5$ at position 0.5, and the third column has an intensity of $i= 1.5$ at position 0.7. The stimulus begins at the same time for all three examples and has the same duration and spatial width: 5 ms, 1 ms, and 0.04, respectively. These results were obtained using the Firedrake finite element library FiredrakeUserManual.
  • Figure 3: Examples from the test and validation datasets for the FHN model. Each column illustrates the evolution of the voltage V (second row) and the recovery variable w (third row) in response to an applied current $I_{app}$\ref{['eq:applied_current']} (first row). In particular, the first column has an intensity $i=0.1$ at $t=32$ ms and position $0.25$; the second column has an intensity $i=0.5$ at $t=2$ ms and position $0.5$; and the third column has an intensity $i=1.5$ at $t=20$ ms and position $0.7$. For all three cases, the stimulus duration and spatial width are held constant at 1 ms and 0.04, respectively. These results were obtained using the Firedrake finite element library FiredrakeUserManual.
  • Figure 4: Visual representation of a Convolutional Neural Operator with channel multiplier $C$ and initial resolution equal to $64$ with four layers.
  • Figure 5: Visual representation of a DON architecture.
  • ...and 19 more figures