AccScience Publishing / NSCE / Online First / DOI: 10.36922/NSCE025470018
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Solving the Fisher KPP nonlinear differential equations via physics-informed neural networks: A comprehensive retraining study and comparative analysis with the finite difference method

Ahmed Miloudi1* Ahmed Aberqi2
Show Less
1 Department of Biophysics and Clinical MRI Methods, Laboratory of Clinical Neuroscience, Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah University, Fez, Morocco
2 Department of Engineering Mathematics and Applications, Laboratory LSATE, National School of Applied Sciences, Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah University, Fez, Morocco
Received: 20 November 2025 | Revised: 25 December 2025 | Accepted: 7 January 2026 | Published online: 6 February 2026
© 2026 by the Author(s). This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution -Noncommercial 4.0 International License (CC-by the license) ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ )
Abstract

Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) combine deep learning with physical constraints to solve differential equations by embedding governing laws into the training process. This study examines the application of PINNs to the one-dimensional nonlinear Fisher–Kolmogorov–Petrovsky–Piskunov equation, a prototypical reaction–diffusion model with applications in population dynamics and flame propagation. A standard PINN framework was employed, incorporating the governing equation, initial conditions, and boundary conditions into a unified loss function. Model predictions were validated against analytical solutions and numerical approximations obtained using the finite difference method. The results demonstrate that PINNs can accurately approximate the Fisher–Kolmogorov–Petrovsky–Piskunov solution, achieving strong agreement with both analytical and numerical benchmarks. An analysis of retraining strategies further elucidates the influence of optimizer state retention and network complexity on convergence behavior and solution accuracy. These findings highlight trade-offs between model expressiveness, training efficiency, and numerical fidelity, thereby confirming PINNs as a competitive and flexible alternative to classical numerical methods for nonlinear partial differential equations.

Keywords
Finite difference method
Nonlinear Fisher–Kolmogorov–Petrovsky– Piskunov equation
Numerical
Physics-informed neural networks
Scientific machine learning
Funding
None.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
References
  1. LeVeque RJ. Finite Difference Methods for Ordinary and Partial Differential Equations: Steady-State and Time-Dependent Problems. SIAM; 2007.

 

  1. Glorot X, Bengio Y. Understanding the difficulty of training deep feedforward neural networks. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics (AISTATS), Vol 9; May 13–15, 2010; Chia Laguna Resort, Sardinia, Italy; 2010:249-256.

 

  1. Raissi M, Perdikaris P, Karniadakis GE. Physics-informed neural networks: a deep learning framework for solving forward and inverse problems involving nonlinear partial differential equations. J Comput Phys. 2019;378:686-707. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2018.10.045.

 

  1. Kolmogorov AN, Petrovsky IG, Piskunov NS. A study of the diffusion equation with increase in the amount of substance, and its application to a biological problem. Mosc Univ Math Bull. 1937;1(6)1-26.

 

  1. Fisher RA. The wave of advance of advantageous genes. Ann Eugen. 1937;7(4):355-369. https://www.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-1809.1937.tb02153.x.

 

  1. Karniadakis GE, Kevrekidis IG, Lu L, et al. Physics-informed machine learning. Nat Rev Phys. 2021;3:422-440. https://www.doi.org/10.1038/s42254-021-00314-5.

 

  1. Lu L, Meng X, Mao Z, Karniadakis GE. DeepXDE: a deep learning library for solving differential equations. SIAM Rev. 2021;63(1):208-228. https://www.doi.org/10.1137/19M1274067.

 

  1. Pang G, Lu L, Karniadakis GE. fpinns: fractional physics-informed neural networks. SIAM J Sci Comput. 2019;41(4):A2603-A2626. https://www.doi.org/10.1137/18M1229845.

 

  1. Byrd RH, Lu P, Nocedal J, Zhu C. A limited memory algorithm for bound-constrained optimization. SIAM J Sci Comput. 1995;16(5):1190-1208. https://www.doi.org/10.1137/0916069.

 

  1. Wang S, Teng Y, Perdikaris P. Understanding and mitigating gradient pathologies in physics-informed neural networks. SIAM J Sci Comput. 2021;43(5):A3055-A3081. https://www.doi.org/10.1137/20M1318043.

 

  1. Tancik M, Srinivasan P, Mildenhall B, et al. Fourier features let networks learn high frequency functions in low dimensional domains. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 2020;33. arXiv preprint. https://arxiv.org/abs/2006.10739. Accessed March 22, 2025

 

  1. Weickenmeier J, Kurt M, Ozkaya E, et al. Brain stiffens post mortem. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2018;84:88-98. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2018.04.009.

 

  1. Fornari S, Schafer A, Jucker M, Goriely A, Kuhl E. Prion-like spreading of Alzheimer’s disease within the brain’s connectome. J R Soc Interface. 2019;16(159):20190356. https://www.doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2019.0356.

 

  1. Kingma DP, Ba J. Adam: a method for stochastic optimization. arXiv preprint. https://arxiv.org/abs/1412.6980. Accessed July 14, 2025.

 

  1. Hornik K. Approximation capabilities of multilayer feedforward networks. Neural Netw. 1991;4(2):251-257. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/0893-6080(91)90009-T.
Share
Back to top
Nonlinear Science and Control Engineering, Published by AccScience Publishing