Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This study evaluates the performance of Kolmogorov Arnold networks (KANs) in predicting surface pressure distributions over subsonic and transonic airfoils, comparing them with multilayer perceptrons (MLPs) and graph neural networks (GNNs). While KANs exhibit good performance and lower complexity leading to faster training, they are found to be marginally inferior to MLPs and less stable during training, with their effectiveness heavily reliant on hyperparameter optimization. The findings suggest that although KANs have potential, GNNs outperform them in this specific aerodynamic application, highlighting the nuanced trade-offs between model complexity and training stability.
KANs show promise in aerodynamic prediction but struggle with stability and hyperparameter sensitivity compared to MLPs and GNNs.
Kolmogorov Arnold networks (KAN) have recently been introduced as a (deep) neural network architecture whose trainable parameters adapt the activation functions, instead of the coefficients of the affine transformations at the core of traditional architectures such as deep multilayer perceptrons (MLPs). This architecture builds on the Kolmogorov-Arnold theorem, which endows it with universal approximation properties. While the advent of KANs has been received with excitement, there is a current debate about the possible KAN supremacy over deep multilayer perceptrons (MLPs) for classic fields such as symbolic regression, generic-purpose machine learning, natural language processing or computer vision. Here we assess the performance of KANs --and its nuanced comparison against MLPs and graph neural networks (GNNs)-- in the realm of fluid dynamics surrogate modelling. To that aim, we consider the task of predicting the surface pressure distribution over subsonic and transonic airfoils, a canonical task in aerodynamics. Our results show that KAN models show good performance in predicting the whole pressure coefficients and is able to interpolate across Mach numbers and angles of attack, however its performance is comparable --marginally inferior-- to a suitably trained MLP, where best performance is achieved by a GNN at the expense or requiring lengthier training. While the optimal KAN model have typically much lower complexity than MLP and GNN --hence resulting in faster training--, we find that KANs suffer from training instabilities, and their performance is highly dependent on a proper hyperparameter optimisation.
