Turbulence forecasting via Neural ODE.

Fluid turbulence is characterized by strong coupling across a broad range of scales. Furthermore, besides the usual local cascades, such coupling may extend to interactions that are non-local in scale-space. As such the computational demands associated with explicitly resolving the full set of scales and their interactions, as in the Direct Numerical Simulation (DNS) of the Navier-Stokes equations, in most problems of practical interest are so high that reduced modeling of scales and interactions is required before further progress can be made. While popular reduced models are typically based on phenomenological modeling of relevant turbulent processes, recent advances in machine learning techniques have energized efforts to further improve the accuracy of such reduced models. In contrast to such efforts that seek to improve an existing turbulence model, we propose a machine learning(ML) methodology that captures, de novo, underlying turbulence phenomenology without a pre-specified model form. To illustrate the approach, we consider transient modeling of the dissipation of turbulent kinetic energy, a fundamental turbulent process that is central to a wide range of turbulence models using a Neural ODE approach. After presenting details of the methodology, we show that this approach outperforms state-of-the-art approaches.

[1]  Yifan Sun,et al.  NeuPDE: Neural Network Based Ordinary and Partial Differential Equations for Modeling Time-Dependent Data , 2019, MSML.

[2]  Prasanna Balaprakash,et al.  Time-series learning of latent-space dynamics for reduced-order model closure , 2019, Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena.

[3]  Peetak Mitra,et al.  A data-driven approach to modeling turbulent flows in an engine environment , 2019 .

[4]  Anima Anandkumar,et al.  A data-driven approach to modeling turbulent decay at non-asymptotic Reynolds numbers , 2019 .

[5]  M. Chertkov,et al.  Physics-informed deep neural networks applied to scalar subgrid flux modeling in a mixed DNS/LES framework , 2019 .

[6]  Daniel Livescu,et al.  Autonomous RANS/LES hybrid models with data-driven subclosures , 2019 .

[7]  Richard G. Baraniuk,et al.  InfoCNF: An Efficient Conditional Continuous Normalizing Flow with Adaptive Solvers , 2019, ArXiv.

[8]  David Duvenaud,et al.  Latent ODEs for Irregularly-Sampled Time Series , 2019, ArXiv.

[9]  Ling Zhou,et al.  Geometrization of deep networks for the interpretability of deep learning systems , 2019, ArXiv.

[10]  Omer San,et al.  An artificial neural network framework for reduced order modeling of transient flows , 2018, Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul..

[11]  Franco Turini,et al.  A Survey of Methods for Explaining Black Box Models , 2018, ACM Comput. Surv..

[12]  David Duvenaud,et al.  Neural Ordinary Differential Equations , 2018, NeurIPS.

[13]  N. Jones,et al.  Quantifying Diapycnal Mixing in an Energetic Ocean , 2018 .

[14]  Carlos Guestrin,et al.  Model-Agnostic Interpretability of Machine Learning , 2016, ArXiv.

[15]  Daan Wierstra,et al.  Stochastic Backpropagation and Approximate Inference in Deep Generative Models , 2014, ICML.

[16]  Max Welling,et al.  Auto-Encoding Variational Bayes , 2013, ICLR.

[17]  J. B. Perot,et al.  Modeling turbulent dissipation at low and moderate Reynolds numbers , 2006 .

[18]  S. Pope,et al.  A deterministic forcing scheme for direct numerical simulations of turbulence , 1998 .

[19]  K M Case,et al.  NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF TURBULENCE , 1973 .

[20]  W. Jones,et al.  The prediction of laminarization with a two-equation model of turbulence , 1972 .

[21]  P. Saffman The large-scale structure of homogeneous turbulence , 1967, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[22]  A. Townsend,et al.  Decay of turbulence in the final period , 1948, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences.