LAPSE:2025.0438
Published Article

LAPSE:2025.0438
Physics-Informed Graph Neural Networks for Modeling Spatially Distributed Dynamically Operated Processes
June 27, 2025
Abstract
Modeling process systems by use of partial differential equations is often complex and computationally expensive, especially for inverse problems such as optimization, state identification, or parameter estimation. Data-driven methods typically provide efficient alternatives with lower computational cost. One such method is Graph Neural Networks (GNNs), which can be used to model dynamical systems as graphs. However, dynamic GNNs often face challenges with extrapolation and representability. Integrating mechanistic insights in surrogate models can improve both prediction accuracy and interpretability. This study compares different strategies for embedding physics-based insights into GNNs to model the dynamic behavior of a catalytic CO2 methanation reactor. The hybrid integration of physics-informed GNNs aims to improve the predictive ability and interpretability while reducing the model development time, thereby facilitating faster deployment. Results show that penalizing the predicted change in reactor states from one time step to the next during training reduces the Frobenius error norm of GNN predictions from about 2.2 % to 1.4 %. In contrast, using a traditional physics-based loss function during training results in a Frobenius norm as high as 8.7 %. This highlights the importance of comparing different strategies for embedding physical laws into data-driven models.
Modeling process systems by use of partial differential equations is often complex and computationally expensive, especially for inverse problems such as optimization, state identification, or parameter estimation. Data-driven methods typically provide efficient alternatives with lower computational cost. One such method is Graph Neural Networks (GNNs), which can be used to model dynamical systems as graphs. However, dynamic GNNs often face challenges with extrapolation and representability. Integrating mechanistic insights in surrogate models can improve both prediction accuracy and interpretability. This study compares different strategies for embedding physics-based insights into GNNs to model the dynamic behavior of a catalytic CO2 methanation reactor. The hybrid integration of physics-informed GNNs aims to improve the predictive ability and interpretability while reducing the model development time, thereby facilitating faster deployment. Results show that penalizing the predicted change in reactor states from one time step to the next during training reduces the Frobenius error norm of GNN predictions from about 2.2 % to 1.4 %. In contrast, using a traditional physics-based loss function during training results in a Frobenius norm as high as 8.7 %. This highlights the importance of comparing different strategies for embedding physical laws into data-driven models.
Record ID
Keywords
CO2 Methanation, Graph Neural Networks, Hybrid modeling, Scientific Machine Learning
Suggested Citation
Khalid MM, Peterson L, Medina EIS, Sundmacher K. Physics-Informed Graph Neural Networks for Modeling Spatially Distributed Dynamically Operated Processes. Systems and Control Transactions 4:1781-1786 (2025) https://doi.org/10.69997/sct.101576
Author Affiliations
Khalid MM: Process Systems Engineering, Max Planck Institute for Dynamics of Complex Technical Systems, Sandtorstraße 1, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany; Chair for Process Systems Engineering, Otto-von-Guericke University, Universitätsplatz 2, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany
Peterson L: Process Systems Engineering, Max Planck Institute for Dynamics of Complex Technical Systems, Sandtorstraße 1, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany
Medina EIS: Process Systems Engineering, Max Planck Institute for Dynamics of Complex Technical Systems, Sandtorstraße 1, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany
Sundmacher K: Process Systems Engineering, Max Planck Institute for Dynamics of Complex Technical Systems, Sandtorstraße 1, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany; Chair for Process Systems Engineering, Otto-von-Guericke University, Universitätsplatz 2, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany
Peterson L: Process Systems Engineering, Max Planck Institute for Dynamics of Complex Technical Systems, Sandtorstraße 1, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany
Medina EIS: Process Systems Engineering, Max Planck Institute for Dynamics of Complex Technical Systems, Sandtorstraße 1, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany
Sundmacher K: Process Systems Engineering, Max Planck Institute for Dynamics of Complex Technical Systems, Sandtorstraße 1, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany; Chair for Process Systems Engineering, Otto-von-Guericke University, Universitätsplatz 2, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany
Journal Name
Systems and Control Transactions
Volume
4
First Page
1781
Last Page
1786
Year
2025
Publication Date
2025-07-01
Version Comments
Original Submission
Other Meta
PII: 1781-1786-1407-SCT-4-2025, Publication Type: Journal Article
Record Map
Published Article

LAPSE:2025.0438
This Record
External Link

https://doi.org/10.69997/sct.101576
Article DOI
Download
Meta
Record Statistics
Record Views
1239
Version History
[v1] (Original Submission)
Jun 27, 2025
Verified by curator on
Jun 27, 2025
This Version Number
v1
Citations
Most Recent
This Version
URL Here
https://psecommunity.org/LAPSE:2025.0438
Record Owner
PSE Press
Links to Related Works
References Cited
- M. von Stosch, R. Oliveira, J. Peres, S. F. de Azevedo. Hybrid semi-parametric modeling in process systems engineering: Past, present and future. Comput. Chem. Eng. 60:86-101 (2014) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2013.08.008
- A. M. Schweidtmann, D. Zhang, M. von Stosch. A review and perspective on hybrid modeling methodologies. Digit. Chem. Eng. 100136 (2023) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dche.2023.100136
- K. Ghaib, F.-Z. Ben-Fares. Power-to-Methane: A state-of-the-art review. Ren. Sus. E. Reviews 81:433-446 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.08.004
- R. T. Zimmermann, J. Bremer, and K. Sundmacher. Load-flexible fixed-bed reactors by multi-period design optimization. Chem. Eng. J. 428:130771 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2021.130771
- L. Peterson, A. Forootani, E. I. Sanchez Medina, I. V. Gosea, K. Sundmacher, P. Benner. Towards digital twins for Power-to-X: Comparing surrogate models for a catalytic CO2 methanation reactor. TechRxiv (2024) https://doi.org/10.36227/techrxiv.172263007.76668955/v1
- M. Gori, G. Monfardini, and F. Scarselli. A new model for learning in graph domains. Proc. 2005 IEEE IJCNN 2: 729-734 (2005) https://doi.org/10.1109/IJCNN.2005.1555942
- P. Velickovic, G. Cucurull, A. Casanova, A. Romero, P. Liò, Y. Bengio. Graph attention networks. ICLR 2018 (2018)
- Y. Seo, M. Defferrard, P. Vandergheynst, X. Bresson. Structured sequence modeling with graph convolutional recurrent networks. arXiv (2016)
- A. Sanchez-Gonzalez, J. Godwin, T. Pfaff, R. Ying, J. Leskovec, P. W. Battaglia. Learning to simulate complex physics with graph networks. ICML 2020 (2020)
- T. Pfaff, M. Fortunato, A. Sanchez-Gonzalez, P. W. Battaglia. Learning mesh-based simulation with graph networks. arXiv (2021)
- H. Zhang, L. Jiang, X. Chu, Y. Wen, L. Li, Y. Xiao, L. Wang. Combining physics-informed graph neural network and finite difference for solving forward and inverse spatiotemporal PDEs. arXiv (2024) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2024.109462
- D. Kingma and J. Ba. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. ICLR 2015 (2015)
- M. Raissi, P. Perdikaris, G. Karniadakis. Physics-informed neural networks: A deep learning framework for solving forward and inverse problems involving nonlinear partial differential equations. J. Comput. Phys. 378:686-707 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2018.10.045
(0.09 seconds)
[0.1 s]

