SAVRN
Search Contact SAVRN

Open-weight model

agfno-darcy

by Sehaj Randhir Singh Sejibeji/agfno-darcy

Adaptive Geometry-Aware Fourier Neural Operator — with the complete controlled-evidence stack, extended depth sweep to 16, a second PDE family, a deformation baseline, a direct measurement of geometric forgetting, and a fully programmatic research paper…

Parameters
Context
Weights156.7 MB
Licensecc-by-4.0
AccessOpen weights
Monthly Downloads

Model Card

By Sehaj Randhir Singh, published under cc-by-4.0, revision 05b93b94ab6f.

Adaptive Geometry-Aware Fourier Neural Operator — with the complete controlled-evidence stack, extended depth sweep to 16, a second PDE family, a deformation baseline, a direct measurement of geometric forgetting, and a fully programmatic research paper (paper/agfnopaper.pdf). (mode truncation discards everything above the cut). A zero-gated, SDF-derived multiplicative modulation of the spectral weights restores the truncated band by spectral convolution — and the paper measures the whole story: diagnosis (proposition), fix (mechanism), consequence (probe). = 0.971× FNO's global error — the gain is NOT extra parameters (5.10M vs 4.81M) or channels (identical 3-channel inputs). −56% ring.…

Read Sehaj Randhir Singh's full model card

AGF-NO: Restoring the Truncated Band in Spectral Operators

Adaptive Geometry-Aware Fourier Neural Operator — with the complete controlled-evidence stack, extended depth sweep to 16, a second PDE family, a deformation baseline, a direct measurement of geometric forgetting, and a fully programmatic research paper (paper/agfno_paper.pdf).

Core claim: FNO's global mixing channel is structurally band-limited (mode truncation discards everything above the cut). A zero-gated, SDF-derived multiplicative modulation of the spectral weights restores the truncated band by spectral convolution — and the paper measures the whole story: diagnosis (proposition), fix (mechanism), consequence (probe).

1. Attribution result (obstacle Darcy, 3 seeds, identical budgets)

Variant rel-L² (global) rel-L² (ring) Wall fidelity
FNO baseline 0.1232 ± 0.0012 0.2497 ± 0.0007 0.0665
AGF-NO gates-frozen (capacity control) 0.1197 0.2484 0.0709
AGF-NO spec-only 0.1003 0.1361 0.0069
AGF-NO (full mechanism) 0.0805 ± 0.0019 0.1106 ± 0.0046 0.0051
FNO, no penalty 0.1250 0.2577 0.0821
AGF-NO, no penalty 0.0818 0.1147 0.0091
  • Capacity control: frozen network (identical graph, gates hard-zeroed) = 0.971× FNO's global error — the gain is NOT extra parameters (5.10M vs 4.81M) or channels (identical 3-channel inputs).
  • Mechanism: full AGF-NO beats its own frozen self by −33% global / −56% ring. ~33σ seed separation vs FNO.
  • Loss: removing the boundary penalty moves ring error by −3.7%; the advantage is architectural.

2. Depth to 16: collapse vs plateau (the paper's headline)

depth 4 depth 6 depth 8 depth 16
FNO rel-L² (global) 0.1283 0.1392 0.1444 1.0053 (collapse)
AGF-NO rel-L² (global) 0.0813 0.1050 0.1190 0.0846 (depth-stable)
FNO probe R² (final block) 0.567 0.475 0.502 0.0003 (total)
AGF-NO probe R² (final block) 0.626 0.607 0.652 0.633 (plateau)

At depth 16 the vanilla FNO is worse than predicting the mean, and its latent carries zero linearly decodable geometry — behavioural and representational collapse coincide, as the truncation-band-limitation proposition requires. AGF-NO's probe plateaus within 0.045 R² across depths 4–16 and its ring error improves with depth (0.1163 → 0.1057): depth becomes a resource instead of a liability.

Three-seed replication (all cells re-run, mean ± std):

depth 4 depth 8 depth 16
FNO rel-L² 0.1250 ± 0.0030 0.1449 ± 0.0040 1.0054 ± 0.0016
AGF-NO rel-L² 0.0801 ± 0.0010 0.1109 ± 0.0058 0.0841 ± 0.0012

The collapse is essentially deterministic: 11.96× error gap at depth 16 with zero overlap across seeds; FNO's worst-case seed is 1.0036 (still collapsed), AGF-NO's seed spread is 1.4% of its mean. Forgetting at depth is not a tail event — it is what the architecture does. AGF-NO's best cell is depth 4; the honest claim is depth-stable vs depth-collapsing.

3-D replication (the phenomenon is dimension-independent)

The full stack lifts to 3-D obstacle Darcy — spheres and solid tori (multiply-connected, so deformation-based escapes stay structurally unavailable), analytic SDFs, float64 PCG ground truth (every stored field satisfies the discrete PDE to <1e-6 relative residual), zero-gate capacity control unchanged, res 32 → zero-shot 48.

Measured (3 seeds × {fno, agfno} × depth {4, 16}, experiments4/):

rel-L² (3-D) depth 4 depth 16
FNO global 0.144 ± 0.020 1.008 ± 0.000 — collapsed, zero seed overlap
AGF-NO global 0.077 ± 0.002 0.113 ± 0.003 — depth-stable
FNO near-wall 0.229 ± 0.007 0.907
AGF-NO near-wall 0.085 ± 0.002 0.124 (1.45× its depth-4 value)

The 2-D collapse reproduces unchanged in 3-D: FNO's probe-decodable SDF information falls 0.494 → 0.020 (R²) from depth 4 to 16 — geometry is essentially erased from its features — while AGF-NO holds 0.494 at depth 16 (24× more decodable geometry, gate G3). Near-wall error ratio at depth 16: 7.3× (gate G1; FNO's wall violation also explodes 0.034 → 0.771). The only honest caveat, carried into the paper: AGF-NO's near-wall error does grow 1.45× from depth 4 to 16 (gate G2 measures stability, not constancy) — the plateau is not perfectly flat in 3-D, but 0.124 vs FNO's 0.907 is not a close call. All pre-registered gates pass (ALL_GATES_PASS: true).

3. The forgetting measurement (the novel artifact)

A closed-form linear probe asks, per block: how much SDF information is still linearly decodable from the latent? Shallow sweep (depths 1–4): FNO falls 0.896 → 0.472 monotonically; AGF-NO falls 0.934 → 0.591. The probe ships with unit-tested null (noise → R² ≈ 0) and sanity (linear embeddings → R² > 0.99) controls.

4. Frequency-resolved analysis (P1/P2)

  • SDF spectrum: 99.70% of energy below the architectural cut, 0.013% above — the direct tail is tiny; restoration is dominated by multiplicative mixing (measured >20× high-band regeneration; unit-tested, constant modulation = 0).
  • P2 confirmed: FNO's high-band ring error 0.0897 → AGF-NO 0.0513 (−43%), high-over-low ratio halved (0.174 → 0.077). The reduction is exactly in the truncated band near walls.
  • P1 consistent: wall perturbation influence more wall-confined in FNO (ring/far 1.66) than AGF-NO (1.32).

5. External validity

  • Canonical piecewise-constant Darcy (no penalty, no ring loss): FNO 0.1940 / frozen 0.2030 / AGF-NO 0.1450 — ordering replicates with confounds removed. Published references quoted for scale only (FNO 0.0082 @85², Geo-FNO 0.0068; not comparable).
  • Deform-FNO baseline: global 0.1058 (beats FNO) but ring 0.2385 (≈ FNO's blindness) — deformation fixes the simply-connected part, cannot touch multiply-connected walls, exactly as predicted.
  • Second PDE family (advection–diffusion past fixed-temperature obstacles, zero-shot rollout to 2T): honest near-null — capacity control passes (frozen 1.025× FNO) but mechanism gain is only −2% T / −3.5% ring / −2.5% at 2T. Interpretation in the paper: the mechanism is a targeted fix for wall-anchored difficulty (Darcy's solution is singular at walls; advected thermal layers are smeared downstream). Reported, not hidden.
  • A-priori diagnostic (Δρ): predicts where the mechanism helps. Δρ = truncated-band ring-energy fraction of target minus input, on the model's own mode cut. PDE1: +0.0244 (the solve must create high-band wall content) → mechanism gain 0.445. PDE2: −0.0236 (high-band steps are given in the input; diffusion smooths) → gain 0.965 (null). Equal magnitude, opposite sign, matching the observed gains. The naive statistic (target-only ρ) inverts the ranking — documented as a negative result. A new benchmark: compute Δρ before training; it costs two FFTs.

6. Headline run (2,000 samples, 300 epochs, T4)

Metric FNO AGF-NO Gain
rel-L² (global) 0.1004 0.0541 −46%
rel-L² (ring) 0.2334 0.0627 −73%
Wall fidelity 0.0769 0.0129 5.9×
Zero-shot 2× super-res 0.4666 0.2295 −51%

Repository contents

  • paper/agfno_paper.pdf — the full 10-page research paper (every number programmatically generated from the JSONs; macros pipeline included).
  • fno_*.pt, agfno_*.pt — headline checkpoints.
  • experiments/ — controlled suite: per-variant/per-seed results, ablations, depth sweep, probe (probe/forgetting_probe.json).
  • experiments2/ — extended suite: PDE2 matrix + rollout, depth 4/6/8/16, Geo-FNO baseline, extended probe, frequency analysis.
  • experiments3/ — 3-seed depth sweep (error bars, replication table).
  • diagnostic/ — the a-priori Δρ statistic on both PDE families.
  • experiments4/ — 3-D replication: sphere+torus Darcy, depth 4/16, 3 seeds, probe, zero-shot SR to res 48.
  • benchmark/ — canonical piecewise-constant Darcy results.
  • results.json, reeval_results.json — headline metrics + local cross-validation (matches remote to 4 decimals).

Reproducibility

One-click public reruns (self-contained kernels, no internet needed): full run · controlled suite · benchmark · extended suite · 3-seed depth sweep · Δρ diagnostic · 3-D replication. Data are byte-deterministic (seed-pinned); 41 unit tests cover the architecture (zero-gate ≡ FNO equivalence, both dimensions), the 2-D and 3-D solvers, SDFs, losses, probe controls, and the band-restoration property.

Honest limitations

Two PDE families, two dimensions (2-D and 3-D synthetic); no external reimplementation at matched settings; probe measures linear decodability (lower bound); PDE2 result shows the mechanism's scope is wall-anchored difficulty; obstacles are static (3-D tori restore multiply-connectedness, but not deforming boundaries over time).

Identity and Version

Repository
Sejibeji/agfno-darcy
Publisher
Sehaj Randhir Singh
Task
Not stated by the source
Modality
Other
Library
pytorch
Parameters
Not stated by the source
Languages
pde
Revision
05b93b94ab6f924997f34b7cde1a069640d5b350
First published
2026-09-09
Last updated
2026-09-18

Files and Weights

71 files, 158.6 MB in total. The weights are 4 files totalling 156.7 MB in pt.

Weights4 files · 156.7 MB
Configuration50 files · 82.7 KB
Documentation1 file · 9.9 KB
Other15 files · 1.8 MB
Repository1 file · 1.8 KB
Every file
FileTypeSizeSHA-256
agfno_best.ptWeights40.2 MB 1871bb0056de
agfno_final.ptWeights40.2 MB 48ae9b04aa09
fno_best.ptWeights38.1 MB eb80488e2bf7
fno_final.ptWeights38.1 MB 9ad0104118ce
benchmark/summary.jsonConfiguration2.1 KB
diagnostic/diagnostic.jsonConfiguration1.5 KB
diagnostic/diagnostic_rho_kernel.jsonConfiguration851 B
experiments/summary.jsonConfiguration4.7 KB
experiments2/analysis/frequency_analysis.jsonConfiguration3.9 KB
experiments2/probe_ext/forgetting_probe.jsonConfiguration12.3 KB
experiments2/runs/experiments2/pde2_agfno_frozen_s0/run_results.jsonConfiguration267 B
experiments2/runs/experiments2/pde2_agfno_s0/run_results.jsonConfiguration263 B
experiments2/runs/experiments2/pde2_agfno_s1/run_results.jsonConfiguration262 B
experiments2/runs/experiments2/pde2_agfno_s2/run_results.jsonConfiguration264 B
experiments2/runs/experiments2/pde2_fno_s0/run_results.jsonConfiguration260 B
experiments2/runs/experiments2/pde2_fno_s1/run_results.jsonConfiguration259 B
experiments2/runs/experiments2/pde2_fno_s2/run_results.jsonConfiguration260 B
experiments2/runs/experiments2/summary.jsonConfiguration4.1 KB
experiments3/runs/experiments3/d16_agfno_s0/run_results.jsonConfiguration156 B
experiments3/runs/experiments3/d16_agfno_s1/run_results.jsonConfiguration159 B
experiments3/runs/experiments3/d16_agfno_s2/run_results.jsonConfiguration158 B
experiments3/runs/experiments3/d16_fno_s0/run_results.jsonConfiguration151 B
experiments3/runs/experiments3/d16_fno_s1/run_results.jsonConfiguration152 B
experiments3/runs/experiments3/d16_fno_s2/run_results.jsonConfiguration152 B
experiments3/runs/experiments3/d4_agfno_s0/run_results.jsonConfiguration157 B
experiments3/runs/experiments3/d4_agfno_s1/run_results.jsonConfiguration156 B
experiments3/runs/experiments3/d4_agfno_s2/run_results.jsonConfiguration158 B
experiments3/runs/experiments3/d4_fno_s0/run_results.jsonConfiguration151 B
experiments3/runs/experiments3/d4_fno_s1/run_results.jsonConfiguration153 B
experiments3/runs/experiments3/d4_fno_s2/run_results.jsonConfiguration154 B
experiments3/runs/experiments3/d8_agfno_s0/run_results.jsonConfiguration155 B
experiments3/runs/experiments3/d8_agfno_s1/run_results.jsonConfiguration157 B
experiments3/runs/experiments3/d8_agfno_s2/run_results.jsonConfiguration156 B
experiments3/runs/experiments3/d8_fno_s0/run_results.jsonConfiguration153 B
experiments3/runs/experiments3/d8_fno_s1/run_results.jsonConfiguration154 B
experiments3/runs/experiments3/d8_fno_s2/run_results.jsonConfiguration154 B
experiments3/runs/experiments3/summary.jsonConfiguration5.0 KB
experiments4/runs/experiments4/d16_agfno_s0/run_results.jsonConfiguration351 B
experiments4/runs/experiments4/d16_agfno_s1/run_results.jsonConfiguration350 B
experiments4/runs/experiments4/d16_agfno_s2/run_results.jsonConfiguration352 B
experiments4/runs/experiments4/d16_fno_s0/run_results.jsonConfiguration344 B
experiments4/runs/experiments4/d16_fno_s1/run_results.jsonConfiguration348 B
experiments4/runs/experiments4/d16_fno_s2/run_results.jsonConfiguration344 B
experiments4/runs/experiments4/d4_agfno_s0/run_results.jsonConfiguration349 B
experiments4/runs/experiments4/d4_agfno_s1/run_results.jsonConfiguration351 B
experiments4/runs/experiments4/d4_agfno_s2/run_results.jsonConfiguration351 B
experiments4/runs/experiments4/d4_fno_s0/run_results.jsonConfiguration345 B
experiments4/runs/experiments4/d4_fno_s1/run_results.jsonConfiguration349 B
experiments4/runs/experiments4/d4_fno_s2/run_results.jsonConfiguration342 B
experiments4/runs/experiments4/summary.jsonConfiguration5.7 KB
probe/forgetting_probe.jsonConfiguration4.3 KB
reeval_results.jsonConfiguration761 B
results.jsonConfiguration14.6 KB
train_log.jsonConfiguration13.9 KB
README.mdDocumentation9.9 KB
benchmark/benchmark_comparison.pngOther88.0 KB
comparison.pngOther128.3 KB 503334366c59
experiments/ablation_matrix.pngOther67.4 KB
experiments/forgetting_curve.pngOther88.4 KB
experiments/penalty_ablation.pngOther55.7 KB
experiments2/forgetting_curve_ext.pngOther80.7 KB
experiments2/pde2_bars.pngOther38.9 KB
experiments2/probe_ext/forgetting_probe.pngOther104.3 KB 813de3b26e0a
experiments3/forgetting_curve_seeds.pngOther75.2 KB
experiments4/paper/agfno_paper.pdfOther410.1 KB 711bec880147
experiments4/runs/experiments4/forgetting3d.pngOther70.5 KB
paper/agfno_paper.pdfOther422.9 KB 12d2fc9ea06c
probe/forgetting_probe.pngOther94.9 KB
super_resolution.pngOther29.9 KB
training_curves.pngOther82.5 KB
.gitattributesRepository1.8 KB

License and Download

License
cc-by-4.0
Access
Open weights, no gate
Download size
156.7 MB
Download from Sehaj Randhir Singh

Released by Sehaj Randhir Singh through its official repository on Hugging Face. Read the license.

Memory Requirements

PrecisionWeights in memory
As published156.7 MB

Weights only, from the published parameter count; the key-value cache and runtime add to this.

Questions About agfno-darcy

Can I use agfno-darcy commercially?

Yes. agfno-darcy is released under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0. CC BY 4.0 permits sharing and adapting the work, including commercially, provided the creator is credited and changes are indicated.