He visto subs en inglés del área tech y casi todos los cv están en LaTex, yo se usarlo, pero no lo uso porque he visto que en RRHH de aquí (Chile) es mejor usar un cv en word o .pdf. ¿Saben con certeza si usar formato LaTex es mejor, peor, invariante al momento de la selección? ¿añade algo?
hysics-Informed Neural Networks are interesting because they break the standard ML paradigm: instead of approximating an unknown function from data alone, they exploit a known PDE constraint that the solution must satisfy. In principle this should make them converge faster and generalize better.
In practice the loss function makes them notoriously hard to train. The loss is a weighted sum of multiple terms (PDE residual, boundary conditions, initial conditions, data), each with different scales and gradient magnitudes. Several papers have characterized what goes wrong:
Wang, Teng & Perdikaris (2021) showed empirically and theoretically that during training, the gradients from different loss components become severely imbalanced. The optimizer follows whichever loss has the loudest gradient, regardless of which one matters most.
Wang, Yu & Perdikaris (2022) used Neural Tangent Kernel theory to show that the PDE residual term has much smaller eigenvalues than the boundary loss. The network learns boundaries quickly and interior physics slowly — often it never catches up.
Krishnapriyan et al. (NeurIPS 2021) demonstrated that even on simple PDEs like the convection equation, PINNs systematically fail to converge as the convection coefficient grows. This is on textbook problems with reasonable hyperparameters.
Mitigations exist (adaptive loss weighting, causal training, curriculum approaches, architectural fixes that hard-code boundary conditions) but none has fully solved the problem.
I wrote a longer version with full references and applications here: https://cristobalsantana.substack.com/p/the-pinn-loss-function-where-physics
Curious if anyone here has dealt with these training pathologies in production and what worked for you.