Application of Neural Networks for Determine the Radiation Pressure in Two-Moment Radiation Hydrodynamics in Slab Geometry

Downloads

Authors

  • Agnieszka PREGOWSKA Institute of Fundamental Technological Research, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland ORCID ID 0000-0001-9163-9931
  • Wiesław LARECKI Institute of Fundamental Technological Research, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland ORCID ID 0000-0003-0720-8974
  • Janusz SZCZEPANSKI Institute of Fundamental Technological Research, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland ORCID ID 0000-0002-7985-8346

Abstract

In two-moment radiation transport, the closure is the constitutive relation that maps the energy and momentum to the radiation-pressure tensor. Among available closures, the maximum-entropy (ME) approach is the most reliable. However, it is associated with a high computational cost. In this paper, we propose a machine-learning approach for the rapid evaluation of the ME closure for bosonic, classical and fermionic radiation. We generate ME reference data using Gauss–Legendre angular quadrature combined with a robust bisection-based inversion of the moment constraints. Next, we train a small physics-constrained multilayer perceptron (MLP) with output restricted to the physically admissible range (between one third and one). Monotonicity in the reduced flux is enforced, and the derivative is matched to the ME reference. The neural network (NN)-based closure achieves a mean absolute error (MAE) of 9.0×10−4 over the range ϕ ∈ [0, 0.98], which yields a latency reduction of about ∼103× per closure evaluation. In the Marshak wave benchmark the full simulation runs about 247 × faster while the hyperbolicity indicator remains strictly positive (minimum 5.1 · 10−2). Compared with the analytic Kershaw closure for bosonic and classical radiation, our model is substantially more accurate and faster. For practical adoption, we also provide a lightweight rational approximation (MAE 1.01× ∼10−3), and in the bosonic and classical cases we confirm positivity of the hyperbolicity indicator for degeneracy parameters between −5 and 5.

Keywords:

radiation transport, Eddington factor, maximum entropy, neural surrogate, hyperbolicity, Marshak problem

References



  1. J.A. Pons, J. Ma. Ibáñez, J.A. Miralles, Hyperbolic character of the angular moment equations of radiative transfer and numerical methods, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 317(3): 550–562, 2000, https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03679.x


  2. C.D. Levermore, Moment closure hierarchies for kinetic theories, Journal of Statistical Physics, 83: 1021–1065, 1996, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02179552


  3. G.N. Minerbo, Maximum entropy Eddington factors, Journal of Quantitative Spectroscopy and Radiative Transfer, 20(6): 541–545, 1978, https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-4073(78)90024-9


  4. J. Cernohorsky, S. Bludman, Maximum entropy distribution and closure for Bose-Einstein and Fermi-Dirac radiation transport, The Astrophysical Journal, 433: 250, 1994, https://doi.org/10.1086/174640


  5. C.D. Levermore, Relating Eddington factors to flux limiters, Journal of Quantitative Spectroscopy and Radiative Transfer, 31(2): 149–160, 1984, https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-4073(84)90112-2


  6. Z. Banach, W. Larecki, Entropy-based mixed three-moment description of fermionic radiation transport in slab and spherical geometries, Kinetic and Related Models, 10(4): 879–900, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3934/krm.2017035


  7. Z. Banach, W. Larecki, Spectral maximum entropy hydrodynamics of fermionic radiation: a three-moment system for one-dimensional flows, Nonlinearity, 26(6): 1667–1701, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1088/0951-7715/26/6/1667


  8. Z. Banach, W. Larecki, One-dimensional maximum entropy radiation hydrodynamics: three-moment theory, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 45(38): 385501, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/45/38/385501


  9. R. Chu, E. Endeve, C.D. Hauck, A. Mezzacappa, Realizability-preserving DG-IMEX method for the two-moment model of fermion transport, Journal of Computational Physics, 389(C): 62–93, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2019.03.037


  10. F. Schneider, Kershaw closures for linear transport equations in slab geometry I: Model derivation, Journal of Computational Physics, 322: 905–919, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2016.02.080


  11. D.S. Kershaw, Flux limiting nature’s own way – A new method for numerical solution of the transport equation, Technical Report, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, CA, 1976, https://doi.org/10.2172/104974


  12. J. Huang, Y. Cheng, A.J. Christlieb, L.F. Roberts, Machine learning moment closure models for the radiative transfer equation I: Directly learning a gradient based closure, Journal of Computational Physics, 453: 110941, 2022, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2022.110941


  13. J. Huang, Y. Cheng, A.J. Christlieb, L.F. Roberts, Machine learning moment closure models for the radiative transfer equation III: Enforcing hyperbolicity and physical characteristic speeds, Journal of Scientific Computing, 94: 7, 2023, https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s10915-022-02056-7.


  14. J.M. Coale, D.Y. Anistratov, A variable Eddington factor model for thermal radiative transfer with closure based on data-driven shape function, Journal of Computational and Theoretical Transport, 53(2): 153–172, 2024, https://doi.org/10.1080/23324309.2024.2327992


  15. C. Musolino, L. Rezzolla, A practical guide to a moment approach for neutrino transport in numerical relativity, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 528(4): 5952–5971, 2024, https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stae224


  16. H. Andresen, E.P. O’Connor, O.E. Andersen, S.M. Couch, Gray two-moment neutrino transport: Comprehensive tests and improvements for supernova simulations, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 687: A55, 2024, https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/202449776


  17. B. Paprocki, A. Pregowska, J. Szczepanski, Does adding of neurons to the network layer lead to increased transmission efficiency?, IEEE Access, 12: 42701–42709, 2024, https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3379324


  18. B. Paprocki, A. Pregowska, J. Szczepanski, Optimizing information processing in brain-inspired neural networks, Bulletin of the Polish Academy of Sciences Technical Sciences, 68(2): 225–233, 2020, https://doi.org/10.24425/bpasts.2020.131844


  19. G.C. Pomraning, The Equations of Radiation Hydrodynamics, in series: International Series of Monographs in Natural Philosophy, Vol. 54, Dover Publications, Mineola, NY, 1973.


  20. W. Larecki, Z. Banach, Entropic derivation of the spectral Eddington factors, Journal of Quantitative Spectroscopy and Radiative Transfer, 112(15): 2486–2506, 2011, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jqsrt.2011.06.011


  21. W. Larecki, Symmetric conservative form of low-temperature phonon gas hydrodynamics. II. – Equations of heat transport and thermal waves in the case of linear isotropic approximation of phonon frequency spectrum, Il Nuovo Cimento D, 14: 141–176, 1992, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02457349


  22. W. Larecki, Z. Banach, Two-field radiation hydrodynamics in n spatial dimensions, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 49(12): 125501, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/49/12/125501


  23. Z. Banach, W. Larecki, Kershaw-type transport equations for fermionic radiation, Zeitschrift für angewandte Mathematik und Physik, 68(4): 100-1–24, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00033-017-0847-z


  24. W.H. Press, S.A. Teukolsky, W.L. Vetterling, B.P. Flannery, Numerical Recipes in FORTRAN. The Art of Scientific Computing, 3rd ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge–New York, NY, 2007.


  25. R.E. Marshak, Effect of radiation on shock wave behavior, Physics of Fluids, 1(1): 24–29, 1958, https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1724332


  26. T. Shussman, S.I. Heizler, Full self-similar solutions of the subsonic radiative heat equations, Physics of Plasmas, 22(8): 082109, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4927756


  27. E.M. Murchikova, E. Abdikamalov, T. Urbatsch, Analytic closures for M1 neutrino transport, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 469(2): 1725–1737, 2017.