Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Safety

aiqbench analysis

This research identifies a critical vulnerability in Neural PDE operators where data poisoning creates "wrong-physics backdoors," allowing models to output physically plausible but parameter-inaccurate solutions. The study demonstrates that standard validation metrics like clean prediction error are insufficient, as attackers can successfully relink inputs to cached alternate-parameter solutions without degrading overall model smoothness. For the AI community, this highlights an urgent need for provenance-aware verification protocols when deploying surrogate models trained on reusable solver archives.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Wrong-Physics Backdoors in Neural PDE Operators

arXiv3 min read

arXiv:2608.20439v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Neural PDE operators are increasingly trained on reusable solver archives, yet validation often relies on clean prediction error and parameter-agnostic plausibility checks. We introduce cross-parameter relinking, a data-poisoning primitive that makes a triggered input select a valid solution from the same PDE family under an incorrect physical parameter. We term this a wrong-physics backdoor: the output remains physically plausible but is wrong for the intended parameter. The attack exploits tensor-to-parameter provenance failures in multi-parameter archives by stamping the surrogate input and relinking its supervision to a cached alternate-parameter solution for the same latent sample. Across 476 attack campaigns, we evaluate Burgers, advection-diffusion, two-dimensional Navier-Stokes, and an elliptic Poisson case. Fourier Neural Operators and DeepONet provide the primary evidence, with Transformer, GRU, and LSTM models as support. FNO reaches a backdoor success rate of 1.0000 on both advection-diffusion and two-dimensional Navier-Stokes while retaining low clean relative L2 error. Clean-label, label-only, and shuffled controls show that high attack success alone is insufficient: successful attacks must move predictions toward the intended alternate-physics target while preserving bounded clean error. These results expose a structural validation gap: smoothness or generic solver-like behavior is insufficient unless the provenance of the intended physical parameter is also verified.

Abstract:Neural PDE operators are increasingly trained on reusable solver archives, yet validation often relies on clean prediction error and parameter-agnostic plausibility checks. We introduce cross-parameter relinking, a data-poisoning primitive that makes a triggered input select a valid solution from the same PDE family under an incorrect physical parameter. We term this a wrong-physics backdoor: the output remains physically plausible but is wrong for the intended parameter. The attack exploits tensor-to-parameter provenance failures in multi-parameter archives by stamping the surrogate input and relinking its supervision to a cached alternate-parameter solution for the same latent sample. Across 476 attack campaigns, we evaluate Burgers, advection-diffusion, two-dimensional Navier-Stokes, and an elliptic Poisson case. Fourier Neural Operators and DeepONet provide the primary evidence, with Transformer, GRU, and LSTM models as support. FNO reaches a backdoor success rate of 1.0000 on both advection-diffusion and two-dimensional Navier-Stokes while retaining low clean relative L2 error. Clean-label, label-only, and shuffled controls show that high attack success alone is insufficient: successful attacks must move predictions toward the intended alternate-physics target while preserving bounded clean error. These results expose a structural validation gap: smoothness or generic solver-like behavior is insufficient unless the provenance of the intended physical parameter is also verified.

Machine Learning (cs.LG); Computational Physics (physics.comp-ph)

arXiv:2608.20439 [cs.LG]

(or arXiv:2608.20439v1 [cs.LG] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.20439 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 297 words

Related coverage