2405.20905
VENI, VINDy, VICI – a variational reduced-order modeling framework with uncertainty quantification
Paolo Conti, Jonas Kneifl, Andrea Manzoni, Attilio Frangi, Jörg Fehr, Steven L. Brunton, J. Nathan Kutz
correctmedium confidence
- Category
- Not specified
- Journal tier
- Strong Field
- Processed
- Sep 28, 2025, 12:56 AM
- arXiv Links
- Abstract ↗PDF ↗
Audit review
The paper proposes VENI–VINDy–VICI: a VAE-based encoder/decoder for snapshots (VENI), a variational SINDy latent-dynamics identification (VINDy) with Laplace priors for sparsity and a Gaussian likelihood on ż, plus an online sampling procedure (VICI) to integrate latent ODEs and decode trajectories with uncertainty bounds. These are clearly described, including Gaussian q(z|x), Laplace priors for Ξ, a closed-form Laplace–Laplace KL, joint offline training, zero-pdf thresholding, and the online Monte Carlo sampling/integration/decoding pipeline (e.g., VENI/VINDy/VICI overview and problem setup; Gaussian encoder; VINDy model ż|Ξ,z ∼ N(Θ(z,β)Ξ, σ^2I) with Laplacian priors and KL in closed form; joint training sketch; zero-pdf thresholding; VICI sampling and integration) . The candidate solution matches the architecture and key ingredients: VAE ELBO on snapshots, a variational latent-dynamics term with Laplace prior on Ξ and closed-form Laplace–Laplace KL, zero-pdf thresholding, and online Monte Carlo prediction/uncertainty. Its main difference is modeling a discrete-time latent transition p(z_{t+1}|z_t,Ξ) via an Euler step, whereas the paper models a continuous-time derivative likelihood p(ż|z,Ξ); these are consistent discretization variants. The candidate also omits the extra KL(q(z)||p(z)) term that appears when VENI and VINDy are combined (giving a factor of 2 on the KL in the paper’s sketch), and it does not include the optional full-dynamics regularizer the paper uses to stabilize scaling; however, those are weighting/regularization choices rather than conceptual contradictions. Overall, both present a consistent variational ROM with sparsity and UQ; the candidate’s is a discrete-time variant of the paper’s continuous-time formulation.
Referee report (LaTeX)
\textbf{Recommendation:} minor revisions \textbf{Journal Tier:} strong field \textbf{Justification:} The paper offers a coherent and well-motivated variational framework that integrates dimensionality reduction, sparse system identification, and UQ within one pipeline. The derivation of the ELBO terms is sound and the use of Laplace priors and zero-pdf thresholding is principled. Numerical examples are informative. Minor issues remain in aligning the presentation of the joint objective with the implemented loss and clarifying practical aspects (derivative estimation, weighting), but these do not undermine the core contribution.