Stephen Castonguay

Pratanu Roy, Stephen Castonguay

The use of deep learning methods in scientific computing represents a potential paradigm shift in engineering problem solving. One of the most prominent developments is Physics-Informed Neural Networks (PINNs), in which neural networks are trained to satisfy partial differential equations (PDEs). While this method shows promise, the standard version has been shown to struggle in accurately predicting the dynamic behavior of time-dependent problems. To address this challenge, methods have been proposed that decompose the time domain into multiple segments, employing a distinct neural network in each segment and directly incorporating continuity between them in the loss function of the minimization problem. In this work we introduce a method to exactly enforce continuity between successive time segments via a solution ansatz. This hard constrained sequential PINN (HCS-PINN) method is simple to implement and eliminates the need for any loss terms associated with temporal continuity. The method is tested for a number of benchmark problems involving both linear and non-linear PDEs. Examples include various first order time dependent problems in which traditional PINNs struggle, namely advection, Allen-Cahn, and Korteweg-de Vries equations. Furthermore, second and third order time-dependent problems are demonstrated via wave and Jerky dynamics examples, respectively. Notably, the Jerky dynamics problem is chaotic, making the problem especially sensitive to temporal accuracy. The numerical experiments conducted with the proposed method demonstrated superior convergence and accuracy over both traditional PINNs and the soft-constrained counterparts.

Seung Whan Chung, Stephen Castonguay, Sumanta Roy et al.

Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) have emerged as a flexible framework for solving partial differential equations, but their performance on interface problems remains challenging because continuity and flux conditions are typically imposed through soft penalty terms. The standard soft-constraint formulation leads to imperfect interface enforcement and degraded accuracy near interfaces. We introduce two ansatz-based hard-constrained PINN formulations for interface problems that embed the interface physics into the solution representation and thereby decouple interface enforcement from PDE residual minimization. The first, termed the windowing approach, constructs the trial space from compactly supported windowed subnetworks so that interface continuity and flux balance are satisfied by design. The second, called the buffer approach, augments unrestricted subnetworks with auxiliary buffer functions that enforce boundary and interface constraints at discrete points through a lightweight correction. We study these formulations on one- and two-dimensional elliptic interface benchmarks and compare them with soft-constrained baselines. In one-dimensional problems, hard constraints consistently improve interface fidelity and remove the need for loss-weight tuning; the windowing approach attains very high accuracy (as low as $O(10^{-9})$) on simple structured cases, whereas the buffer approach remains accurate ($\sim O(10^{-5})$) across a wider range of source terms and interface configurations. In two dimensions, the buffer formulation is shown to be more robust because it enforces constraints through a discrete buffer correction, as the windowing construction becomes more sensitive to overlap and corner effects and over-constrains the problem. This positions the buffer method as a straightforward and geometrically flexible approach to complex interface problems.