Physical Design using Differentiable Learned Simulators

Designing physical artifacts that serve a purpose— such as tools and other functional structures—is central to engineering as well as everyday human behavior. Though automating design has tremendous promise, general-purpose methods do not yet exist. Here we explore a simple, fast, and robust approach to inverse design which combines learned forward simulators based on graph neural networks with gradient-based design optimization. Our approach solves high-dimensional problems with complex physical dynamics, including designing surfaces and tools to manipulate fluid flows and optimizing the shape of an airfoil to minimize drag. This framework produces highquality designs by propagating gradients through trajectories of hundreds of steps, even when using models that were pre-trained for single-step predictions on data substantially different from the design tasks. In our fluid manipulation tasks, the resulting designs outperformed those found by sampling-based optimization techniques. In airfoil design, they matched the quality of those obtained with a specialized solver. Our results suggest that despite some remaining challenges, machine learning-based simulators are maturing to the point where they can support general-purpose design optimization across a variety of domains.

[1]  Paul Z. Hanakata,et al.  Inverse Design of Inflatable Soft Membranes Through Machine Learning , 2022, Advanced Functional Materials.

[2]  T. Pfaff,et al.  Learned Coarse Models for Efficient Turbulence Simulation , 2021, ArXiv.

[3]  Adithya Challapalli,et al.  Inverse machine learning framework for optimizing lightweight metamaterials , 2021 .

[4]  Yuval Tassa,et al.  Learning Dynamics Models for Model Predictive Agents , 2021, ArXiv.

[5]  Wojciech Matusik,et al.  An End-to-End Differentiable Framework for Contact-Aware Robot Design , 2021, Robotics: Science and Systems.

[6]  Olivier Bachem,et al.  Brax - A Differentiable Physics Engine for Large Scale Rigid Body Simulation , 2021, NeurIPS Datasets and Benchmarks.

[7]  M. Dijkstra,et al.  From predictive modelling to machine learning and reverse engineering of colloidal self-assembly , 2021, Nature Materials.

[8]  A. Majumdar,et al.  Inverse design and flexible parameterization of meta-optics using algorithmic differentiation , 2021 .

[9]  C. Mader,et al.  Efficient Mesh Generation and Deformation for Aerodynamic Shape Optimization , 2021 .

[10]  Surya Ganguli,et al.  Embodied intelligence via learning and evolution , 2021, Nature Communications.

[11]  Stephan Hoyer,et al.  Machine learning–accelerated computational fluid dynamics , 2021, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[12]  Jessica B. Hamrick,et al.  On the role of planning in model-based deep reinforcement learning , 2020, ICLR.

[13]  Nikola B. Kovachki,et al.  Fourier Neural Operator for Parametric Partial Differential Equations , 2020, ICLR.

[14]  T. Pfaff,et al.  Learning Mesh-Based Simulation with Graph Networks , 2020, ICLR.

[15]  D. Kochmann,et al.  Data-driven topology optimization of spinodoid metamaterials with seamlessly tunable anisotropy , 2020, ArXiv.

[16]  Christian Duriez,et al.  On the use of simulation in robotics: Opportunities, challenges, and suggestions for moving forward , 2020, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[17]  J. Zico Kolter,et al.  Combining Differentiable PDE Solvers and Graph Neural Networks for Fluid Flow Prediction , 2020, ICML.

[18]  Joaquim R. R. A. Martins,et al.  Efficient Aerodynamic Shape Optimization with Deep-Learning-Based Geometric Filtering , 2020 .

[19]  M. Soljačić,et al.  Predictive and generative machine learning models for photonic crystals , 2020, Nanophotonics.

[20]  D. Kochmann,et al.  Inverse-designed spinodoid metamaterials , 2020, npj Computational Materials.

[21]  Vladlen Koltun,et al.  Lagrangian Fluid Simulation with Continuous Convolutions , 2020, ICLR.

[22]  Florian Shkurti,et al.  Model-Predictive Control via Cross-Entropy and Gradient-Based Optimization , 2020, L4DC.

[23]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  Learning to Simulate Complex Physics with Graph Networks , 2020, ICML.

[24]  Ping He,et al.  DAFoam: An Open-Source Adjoint Framework for Multidisciplinary Design Optimization with OpenFOAM , 2020 .

[25]  Grace X. Gu,et al.  Generative Deep Neural Networks for Inverse Materials Design Using Backpropagation and Active Learning , 2020, Advanced science.

[26]  Rui Wang,et al.  Towards Physics-informed Deep Learning for Turbulent Flow Prediction , 2019, KDD.

[27]  Gilles Louppe,et al.  The frontier of simulation-based inference , 2019, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[28]  Jonathan Ragan-Kelley,et al.  DiffTaichi: Differentiable Programming for Physical Simulation , 2019, ICLR.

[29]  Ken Goldberg,et al.  Deep Imitation Learning of Sequential Fabric Smoothing From an Algorithmic Supervisor , 2019, 2020 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS).

[30]  Joshua B. Tenenbaum,et al.  Rapid trial-and-error learning with simulation supports flexible tool use and physical reasoning , 2019, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[31]  Nils Thuerey,et al.  Deep Learning Methods for Reynolds-Averaged Navier–Stokes Simulations of Airfoil Flows , 2018, AIAA Journal.

[32]  Jascha Sohl-Dickstein,et al.  Neural reparameterization improves structural optimization , 2019, ArXiv.

[33]  Ross B. Girshick,et al.  PHYRE: A New Benchmark for Physical Reasoning , 2019, NeurIPS.

[34]  Pieter Abbeel,et al.  Benchmarking Model-Based Reinforcement Learning , 2019, ArXiv.

[35]  Sergey Levine,et al.  When to Trust Your Model: Model-Based Policy Optimization , 2019, NeurIPS.

[36]  Karthik Duraisamy,et al.  Prediction of aerodynamic flow fields using convolutional neural networks , 2019, Computational Mechanics.

[37]  Jiajun Wu,et al.  Learning Particle Dynamics for Manipulating Rigid Bodies, Deformable Objects, and Fluids , 2018, ICLR.

[38]  Matthias Bethge,et al.  Generalisation in humans and deep neural networks , 2018, NeurIPS.

[39]  Andre Pradhana,et al.  A moving least squares material point method with displacement discontinuity and two-way rigid body coupling , 2018, ACM Trans. Graph..

[40]  Marc Toussaint,et al.  Differentiable Physics and Stable Modes for Tool-Use and Manipulation Planning , 2018, Robotics: Science and Systems.

[41]  Connor Schenck,et al.  SPNets: Differentiable Fluid Dynamics for Deep Neural Networks , 2018, CoRL.

[42]  Razvan Pascanu,et al.  Relational inductive biases, deep learning, and graph networks , 2018, ArXiv.

[43]  Raia Hadsell,et al.  Graph networks as learnable physics engines for inference and control , 2018, ICML.

[44]  Daniel L. K. Yamins,et al.  Flexible Neural Representation for Physics Prediction , 2018, NeurIPS.

[45]  Sergey Levine,et al.  Deep Reinforcement Learning in a Handful of Trials using Probabilistic Dynamics Models , 2018, NeurIPS.

[46]  Jelena Vucković,et al.  Inverse design in nanophotonics , 2018, Nature Photonics.

[47]  Alán Aspuru-Guzik,et al.  Automatic Chemical Design Using a Data-Driven Continuous Representation of Molecules , 2016, ACS central science.

[48]  W. Cai,et al.  A Generative Model for Inverse Design of Metamaterials , 2018, Nano letters.

[49]  Michael U. Gutmann,et al.  Adaptable Pouring: Teaching Robots Not to Spill using Fast but Approximate Fluid Simulation , 2017, CoRL.

[50]  Samuel S. Schoenholz,et al.  Neural Message Passing for Quantum Chemistry , 2017, ICML.

[51]  Steven L. Brunton,et al.  Data-driven discovery of partial differential equations , 2016, Science Advances.

[52]  K. Butler,et al.  Computational materials design of crystalline solids. , 2016, Chemical Society reviews.

[53]  Huaxiang Wang,et al.  A review on image reconstruction algorithms for electrical capacitance/resistance tomography , 2016 .

[54]  Tianqi Chen,et al.  Training Deep Nets with Sublinear Memory Cost , 2016, ArXiv.

[55]  François Osiurak,et al.  Tool use and affordance: Manipulation-based versus reasoning-based approaches. , 2016, Psychological review.

[56]  Jan Bender,et al.  Divergence-free smoothed particle hydrodynamics , 2015, Symposium on Computer Animation.

[57]  Martial Hebert,et al.  Improving Multi-Step Prediction of Learned Time Series Models , 2015, AAAI.

[58]  Jimmy Ba,et al.  Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization , 2014, ICLR.

[59]  Erik Talvitie,et al.  Model Regularization for Stable Sample Rollouts , 2014, UAI.

[60]  Wojciech Matusik,et al.  Computational design of mechanical characters , 2013, ACM Trans. Graph..

[61]  Beckett Yx Zhou,et al.  Airfoil Optimization Using Practical Aerodynamic Design Requirements , 2010 .

[62]  Ionel M. Navon Data Assimilation for Numerical Weather Prediction: A Review , 2009 .

[63]  R. Pascual-Marqui Review of methods for solving the EEG inverse problem , 1999 .

[64]  W. K. Anderson,et al.  Aerodynamic design optimization on unstructured grids with a continuous adjoint formulation , 1997 .

[65]  Yoshua Bengio,et al.  Learning long-term dependencies with gradient descent is difficult , 1994, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks.

[66]  Richard Eppler,et al.  Airfoil design and data , 1990 .

[67]  C. L. Ladson,et al.  Effects of independent variation of Mach and Reynolds numbers on the low-speed aerodynamic characteristics of the NACA 0012 airfoil section , 1988 .

[68]  C. Rhie,et al.  Numerical Study of the Turbulent Flow Past an Airfoil with Trailing Edge Separation , 1983 .

[69]  B. Beck Animal Tool Behavior: The Use and Manufacture of Tools by Animals , 1980 .