Summary of Comment on “machine Learning Conservation Laws From Differential Equations”, by Michael F. Zimmer
Comment on “Machine learning conservation laws from differential equations”
by Michael F. Zimmer
First submitted to arxiv on: 3 Apr 2024
Categories
- Main: Machine Learning (cs.LG)
- Secondary: None
GrooveSquid.com Paper Summaries
GrooveSquid.com’s goal is to make artificial intelligence research accessible by summarizing AI papers in simpler terms. Each summary below covers the same AI paper, written at different levels of difficulty. The medium difficulty and low difficulty versions are original summaries written by GrooveSquid.com, while the high difficulty version is the paper’s original abstract. Feel free to learn from the version that suits you best!
| Summary difficulty | Written by | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| High | Paper authors | High Difficulty Summary Read the original abstract here |
| Medium | GrooveSquid.com (original content) | Medium Difficulty Summary The paper by Liu, Madhavan, and Tegmark aimed to apply machine learning techniques to derive known conservation laws for various systems. However, in the example of a damped 1D harmonic oscillator, they made seven significant mistakes, rendering both their method and result inaccurate. This study reviews those errors. |
| Low | GrooveSquid.com (original content) | Low Difficulty Summary The paper by Liu, Madhavan, and Tegmark tried to use machine learning methods to find known conservation laws for different systems. But in the example of a damped 1D harmonic oscillator, they got seven things wrong. As a result, their method and answer were both incorrect. This paper explains what went wrong. |
Keywords
» Artificial intelligence » Machine learning
