Pith. Sign in

RECORD

PhysicsGen: Can Generative Models Learn from Images to Predict Complex Physical Relations?

Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition · Submitted 7 Mar 2025

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

The authors' main claim While baseline evaluations of different current models show the potential for high speedups (ii), these results also show strong limitations toward the physical correctness (i).

how it is stated · asserted 0.99 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv ID2503.05333 (version 1)
Pith IDYIXRL7AE, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
CitationJanis Keuper, Jan Vaillant, Martin Spitznagel. "PhysicsGen: Can Generative Models Learn from Images to Predict Complex Physical Relations?." arXiv:2503.05333 (2025). https://pith.science/paper/YIXRL7AE
Claim paper

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Open the compiled record

Compiled by classifier-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 4,941 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.07 · states limitation 0.89 · human participants 0.02 · controlled comparison 0.78 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.78 · compares with prior results 0.87 · mentions code or data availability 0.98.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; .

The image-to-image translation abilities of generative learning models have recently made significant progress in the estimation of complex (steered) mappings between image distributions. While appearance based tasks like image in-painting or style transfer have been studied at length, we propose to investigate the potential of generative models in the context of physical simulations. Providing a dataset of 300k image-pairs and baseline evaluations for three different physical simulation tasks, we propose a benchmark to investigate the following research questions: i) are generative models able to learn complex physical relations from input-output image pairs? ii) what speedups can be achieved by replacing differential equation based simulations? While baseline evaluations of different current models show the potential for high speedups (ii), these results also show strong limitations toward the physical correctness (i). This underlines the need for new methods to enforce physical correctness. Data, baseline models and evaluation code http://www.physics-gen.org.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#sentencerolethe authors' own workstates the main conclusionstrength
s0 The image-to-image translation abilities of generative learning models have recently made significant progress in the estimation of complex (steered) mappings between image distributions. background 1.00 0.05 0.03 asserted 1.00
s1 While appearance based tasks like image in-painting or style transfer have been studied at length, we propose to investigate the potential of generative models in the context of physical simulations. contribution 0.54 0.28 0.03 asserted 0.64
s2 Providing a dataset of 300k image-pairs and baseline evaluations for three different physical simulation tasks, we propose a benchmark to investigate the following research questions: i) are generative models able to learn complex physical relations from input-output image pairs? ii) what speedups can be achieved by replacing differential equation based simulations? contribution 0.94 0.93 0.06 asserted 0.96
s3 While baseline evaluations of different current models show the potential for high speedups (ii), these results also show strong limitations toward the physical correctness (i). result 0.90 0.89 0.49 asserted 0.99
s4 This underlines the need for new methods to enforce physical correctness. interpretation 0.72 0.32 0.53 asserted 0.95
s5 Data, baseline models and evaluation code http://www.physics-gen.org. contribution 0.88 0.29 0.02 unclear 0.65

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: dataset or benchmark 1.00 · evidence from simulation or computation 0.50.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read
  • arXiv listing abstract v1
not examined
  • full text
  • figures and tables
  • references and citing sentences
  • relations to other papers
levels run
  • P abstract
not run
  • S sections
  • T body sentences
  • C citations
  • R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

The paper
Original abstract

The image-to-image translation abilities of generative learning models have recently made significant progress in the estimation of complex (steered) mappings between image distributions. While appearance based tasks like image in-painting or style transfer have been studied at length, we propose to investigate the potential of generative models in the context of physical simulations. Providing a dataset of 300k image-pairs and baseline evaluations for three different physical simulation tasks, we propose a benchmark to investigate the following research questions: i) are generative models able to learn complex physical relations from input-output image pairs? ii) what speedups can be achieved by replacing differential equation based simulations? While baseline evaluations of different current models show the potential for high speedups (ii), these results also show strong limitations toward the physical correctness (i). This underlines the need for new methods to enforce physical correctness. Data, baseline models and evaluation code http://www.physics-gen.org.

Human review
References
How the literature uses it

1 arXiv paper cite this in 1 sentence

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Papers citing it

Cites it as background 1 paper

What it cites · 1 sentence without a confident label

Cites as background 2 papers

Discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.