Miguel A. Mendez

Miguel A. Mendez, Jan van Den Berghe, Manuel Ratz et al.

This chapter provides three tutorial exercises on physics-constrained regression. These are implemented as toy problems that seek to mimic grand challenges in (1) the super-resolution and data assimilation of the velocity field in image velocimetry, (2) data-driven turbulence modeling, and (3) system identification and digital twinning for forecasting and control. The Python codes for all exercises are provided in the course repository.

Miguel A. Mendez

This chapter opens with a review of classic tools for regression, a subset of machine learning that seeks to find relationships between variables. With the advent of scientific machine learning this field has moved from a purely data-driven (statistical) formalism to a constrained or ``physics-informed'' formalism, which integrates physical knowledge and methods from traditional computational engineering. In the first part, we introduce the general concepts and the statistical flavor of regression versus other forms of curve fitting. We then move to an overview of traditional methods from machine learning and their classification and ways to link these to traditional computational science. Finally, we close with a note on methods to combine machine learning and numerical methods for physics

Fabio Pino, Lorenzo Schena, Jean Rabault et al.

Machine learning frameworks such as Genetic Programming (GP) and Reinforcement Learning (RL) are gaining popularity in flow control. This work presents a comparative analysis of the two, bench-marking some of their most representative algorithms against global optimization techniques such as Bayesian Optimization (BO) and Lipschitz global optimization (LIPO). First, we review the general framework of the model-free control problem, bringing together all methods as black-box optimization problems. Then, we test the control algorithms on three test cases. These are (1) the stabilization of a nonlinear dynamical system featuring frequency cross-talk, (2) the wave cancellation from a Burgers' flow and (3) the drag reduction in a cylinder wake flow. We present a comprehensive comparison to illustrate their differences in exploration versus exploitation and their balance between `model capacity' in the control law definition versus `required complexity'. We believe that such a comparison paves the way toward the hybridization of the various methods, and we offer some perspective on their future development in the literature on flow control problems.