Possible to summarize a simulation into a simpler simulation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ScrollPortals
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Simulation
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the possibility of summarizing complex simulations into simpler ones, particularly in the context of particle physics and fluid dynamics. Participants explore methods for programmatically analyzing simulations and the potential for automation in optimization processes.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants inquire whether complex simulations can be simplified into rougher estimations, referencing the need for clarity on the type and degree of simplification.
  • One participant mentions using neural networks for approximations, noting that while they provide answers, they are not exact and function as a black box.
  • A participant shares their experience with optimizing fluid simulations by merging and splitting particles based on their interactions, suggesting that manual optimizations can yield significant performance improvements.
  • Another participant expresses a desire for automated methods to optimize simulations, questioning the feasibility of software that can analyze and improve other software automatically.
  • There is mention of convolutional neural networks as a potential tool for optimization, though uncertainty remains about their applicability to the specific problem at hand.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that simplifications can be made, but there is no consensus on the methods or the feasibility of automation in this context. Multiple competing views on optimization strategies and the role of AI remain present.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the variability of systems being simulated and the challenges posed by different applications, which may affect the generalizability of proposed solutions.

ScrollPortals
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
Is it possible to summarize a complex & heavy process simulation into a simpler simulation with rougher-estimations?
Is there a way to programmatically analyze the particle physics of a simulation? So that they could be converted into a simpler summarized simulation?

For instance. Look at our equations to describe the flow of water. How do we come up with those? What do we measure? Can we do the same for other liquid substances?
 
Technology news on Phys.org
ScrollPortals said:
Is it possible to summarize a complex & heavy process simulation into a simpler simulation with rougher-estimations?

In circuits, we sometimes represent a complex circuit by a Thevanin equivalent. I suspect that is too simple for you.

Your question can't be answered unless you state the type and degree of simplification.
 
When there are resiculous numbers of variables, I occasionally train a neural network to give me approximate answers, but they aren't exact and it's a black box.

People use maths approximations all the time. Quake had a brilliant but simple square root approximator that made the whole game significantly faster. I often create look up tables for trig functions.
 
You're right.
I guess things can be simplified to different degrees.

Unfortunately, the system I'm trying to simplify is always going to be different every time the application loads.

I'll worry about scaling up my simulation's universe & simplifying massive amounts of particles when I actually get to that point.
Right now I have a lot of other things to worry about and program.
 
I actually did my graduating thesis on simulating fluids with particles, it might help you.

My biggest optimization was when two particles were moving in the same direction at the same speed and touched each other, they would merge. If a collision had enough energy and the particles involved were not the smallest particles, it would split.

I also simulated deep water with dynamically partitioned fields that the particles layer on top of.

The simulation did not look exactly like the same simulation run with real particles, but it was very close. My fields and dynamic particles simulation baked on my laptop while my real particle simulation required a rack of servers.
 
Those all seem like manual optimizations. It seems like you picked those things out yourself and optimized them.
I was hoping for an automated way to do that.
 
ScrollPortals said:
Those all seem like manual optimizations. It seems like you picked those things out yourself and optimized them.
I was hoping for an automated way to do that.

Ignore that the application is simulation. You have a piece of software. You are asking if there is automated software that can examine other software and write a better version of it. That is a level of AI which we have not achieved yet.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: QuantumQuest
Yeah, that would require a machine learning algorithm. The best one of those we have is a convolution neural network. It can come up with some amazing solutions to problems, but I'm not sure how helpful it would be for this.

My optimizations were coded by hand, but which particles merged with the field or popped out of it, and whether particles merged or broke was all algorithmic. I just launched the program and let it run for a few days, I never touched it.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 106 ·
4
Replies
106
Views
16K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K