Re:Julia receives DARPA award to accelerate electronics simu...
by amelius on Thursday March 11, 2021 @12:12PM
(#26426376)
Since this is based on ML, I would have trouble trusting the results. Can you verify the results with standard mathematical methods? E.g. solve a linear system using AI, then compute the residue and meaningfully interpret it? Would it be possible to apply ML techniques iteratively, and let the error approach zero?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Julia receives DARPA award to accelerate electronics simu...
by KenoFischer on Thursday March 11, 2021 @12:14PM
(#26426408)
Sure, you can always just run the baseline simulation and compare error rates. You can also do fancier analyses to get some rough idea of robustness and maximum error rates (over your particular parameter domain).
Re:Julia receives DARPA award to accelerate electronics simu...
by Sukera on Thursday March 11, 2021 @12:32PM
(#26426627)
Would this integrate with e.g. Measurements.jl?
Re:Julia receives DARPA award to accelerate electronics simu...
by ChrisRackauckas on Thursday March 11, 2021 @12:47PM
(#26426805)
The error propagation won't be through measurements, because that blows up linearly. There's other approaches which give much more promising results.
Re:Julia receives DARPA award to accelerate electronics simu...
by KenoFischer on Thursday March 11, 2021 @12:41PM
(#26426750)
From an implementation perspective of course, so you can get error propagation on the baseline simulator. For the actual ML part, you'd get Measurements complaining that it doesn't know how to propagate bounds through the surrogate. You can do some estimation of what that propagation would look like, but it's a research project.