Abstract:Transfer in coordinate networks is often measured by warm-start gain, but whether that gain reflects source-specific structure or generic weight reuse is less clear. We study this question across three implicit neural representation (INR) families, SIREN, ReLU MLPs, and Fourier-feature MLPs, using controlled analytic tests, a 2D lid-driven-cavity Navier--Stokes benchmark, and 1D PDE reference-solution suites for heat, viscous Burgers, and focusing cubic NLS. The analytic tests use independent-seed random controls, while the PDE benchmarks use alternate same-family source controls and auxiliary ablations.
Across settings, transfer magnitude and transfer specificity separate clearly. In a 10-seed controlled 1D geometric test, Fourier Features show the largest structured transfer ($33.1\times$), followed by SIREN ($23.0\times$) and ReLU ($10.7\times$), but ReLU is far more selective: random-control transfer is $0.41\times$ for ReLU versus $14.24\times$ for SIREN. On a controlled two-parameter 1D family, the ranking changes: ReLU gives the clearest structured-versus-control separation at default settings, whereas Fourier Features improve only after bandwidth retuning. In Navier--Stokes and the broader 1D PDE suite, no single architecture dominates every equation, yet the same pattern remains: SIREN often reuses weights broadly, whereas ReLU and, in some equations, Fourier Features are more source-selective. Static diagnostics remain weak, and the heuristic scaling law $A_{\text{transfer}} \propto 1/\Delta t^2$ is rejected in the implemented 1D audit.
These results position transfer specificity as a useful diagnostic for coordinate networks and suggest that architecture selection in scientific machine learning should be evaluated under explicit control conditions, not by transfer magnitude alone.
From: D Yang Eng [view email]
[v1]
Fri, 5 Jun 2026 02:05:15 UTC (607 KB)
此内容由惯性聚合(RSS阅读器)自动聚合整理，仅供阅读参考。 原文来自 — 版权归原作者所有。