Physics-Informed Neural Networks for Multiphysics Data Assimilation with Application to Subsurface Transport

QiZhi He,David Brajas-Solano,Guzel Tartakovsky,Alexandre M. Tartakovsky
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2020.103610
2019-12-06
Abstract:Data assimilation for parameter and state estimation in subsurface transport problems remains a significant challenge due to the sparsity of measurements, the heterogeneity of porous media, and the high computational cost of forward numerical models. We present a physics-informed deep neural networks (DNNs) machine learning method for estimating space-dependent hydraulic conductivity, hydraulic head, and concentration fields from sparse measurements. In this approach, we employ individual DNNs to approximate the unknown parameters (e.g., hydraulic conductivity) and states (e.g., hydraulic head and concentration) of a physical system, and jointly train these DNNs by minimizing the loss function that consists of the governing equations residuals in addition to the error with respect to measurement data. We apply this approach to assimilate conductivity, hydraulic head, and concentration measurements for joint inversion of the conductivity, hydraulic head, and concentration fields in a steady-state advection--dispersion problem. We study the accuracy of the physics-informed DNN approach with respect to data size, number of variables (conductivity and head versus conductivity, head, and concentration), DNNs size, and DNN initialization during training. We demonstrate that the physics-informed DNNs are significantly more accurate than standard data-driven DNNs when the training set consists of sparse data. We also show that the accuracy of parameter estimation increases as additional variables are inverted jointly.
Machine Learning,Computational Physics
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The problem that this paper attempts to solve is parameter and state estimation in underground transportation problems. Specifically, due to the sparsity of measurement data, the heterogeneity of porous media, and the high computational cost of forward numerical models, data assimilation in underground transportation problems (i.e., estimating parameters and states from observed data) faces significant challenges. To address these issues, the authors propose a Physics - Informed Neural Networks (PINNs) method for estimating spatially - dependent hydraulic conductivity, water head, and concentration fields from sparse measurement data. This method approximates unknown parameters (such as hydraulic conductivity) and states (such as water head and concentration) by jointly training multiple DNNs and achieving it by minimizing a loss function, which includes not only the error with respect to the measurement data but also the residuals of the governing equations. The following are the specific problems that this paper attempts to solve: 1. **Data Sparsity**: In underground transportation problems, measurement data is usually very limited, making it difficult to accurately estimate parameters and states. 2. **Heterogeneity of Porous Media**: The complexity and heterogeneity of underground media increase the difficulty of parameter estimation. 3. **High Computational Cost**: Traditional numerical models are computationally expensive, which limits their application range. 4. **Non - linear and Non - Gaussian Characteristics**: The inverse problems of underground fluid and transport equations are highly non - linear, and the states and parameters are non - Gaussian distributed, which poses challenges to both direct solution methods and Bayesian parameter estimation methods. By introducing PINNs, the authors aim to use machine - learning techniques to overcome the above challenges and improve the accuracy of parameter and state estimation. Specifically, PINNs can significantly improve the estimation accuracy in the case of sparse data by combining physical laws (such as Darcy's law and the advection - dispersion equation) and measurement data. ### Key Formulas 1. **DNN Approximation Formula**: \[ u(x) \approx \hat{u}(x; \theta) = y_{n_l+1}(y_{n_l}(...(y_2(x)))) \] where, \[ y_2(x) = \sigma(W_1 x + b_1) \] \[ y_3(y_2) = \sigma(W_2 y_2 + b_2) \] \[ ... \] \[ y_{n_l}(y_{n_l-1}) = \sigma(W_{n_l-1} y_{n_l-1} + b_{n_l-1}) \] \[ y_{n_l+1}(y_{n_l}) = \sigma(W_{n_l} y_{n_l} + b_{n_l}) \] 2. **Loss Function**: \[ J(\theta, \gamma) = J_d(\theta, \gamma) + \omega_f J_f(\theta, \gamma) + \omega_b J_b(\theta, \gamma) \] where, \[ J_d(\theta, \gamma) = \frac{1}{|T_u|} \sum_{x \in T_u} (\hat{u}(x; \theta) - u^*(x))^2 + \frac{1}{|T_p|} \sum_{x \in T_p} (\hat{p}(x; \theta) - p^*(x))^2 \] \[ J_f(\theta, \gamma) = \frac{1}{|T_f|} \sum_{x \in T_f} (L(\hat{u}(x; \theta); \hat{p}(x, \gamma)))^2 \] \[ J_b(\theta, \gamma) = \frac{1}{|T_b|} \sum_{x \in T_b} (B(\hat{u}(x; \theta)))^2