The molten sand, a mixture of calcia, magnesia, alumina, and silicate, known as CMAS, is characterized by its high viscosity, density, and surface tension. The unique properties of CMAS make it a challenging material to deal with in high-temperature applications, requiring innovative solutions and materials to prevent its buildup and damage to critical equipment. Here, we use multiphase many-body dissipative particle dynamics (mDPD) simulations to study the wetting dynamics of highly viscous molten CMAS droplets. The simulations are performed in three dimensions, with varying initial droplet sizes and equilibrium contact angles. We propose a coarse parametric ordinary differential equation (ODE) that captures the spreading radius behavior of the CMAS droplets. The ODE parameters are then identified based on the Physics-Informed Neural Network (PINN) framework. Subsequently, the closed form dependency of parameter values found by PINN on the initial radii and contact angles are given using symbolic regression. Finally, we employ Bayesian PINNs (B-PINNs) to assess and quantify the uncertainty associated with the discovered parameters. In brief, this study provides insight into spreading dynamics of CMAS droplets by fusing simple parametric ODE modeling and state-of-the-art machine learning techniques.

Neural networks that solve regression problems map input data to output data, whereas neural operators map functions to functions. This recent paradigm shift in perspective, starting with the original paper on the deep operator network or DeepONet [1, 2], provides a new modeling capability that is very useful in engineering - that is, the ability to replace very complex and computational resource-taxing multiphysics systems with neural operators that can provide functional outputs in real-time. Specifically, unlike other physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) [3] that require optimization during training and testing, a DeepONet does not require any optimization during inference, hence it can be used in realtime forecasting, including design, autonomy, control, etc. An architectural diagram of a DeepONet with the commonly used nomenclature for its components is shown in Figure 1. DeepONets can take a multi-fidelity or multi-modal input [4, 5, 6, 7, 8] in the branch network and can use an independent network as the trunk, a network that represents the output space, e.g. in space-time coordinates or in parametric space in a continuous fashion. In some sense, DeepONets can be used as surrogates in a similar fashion as reduced order models (ROMs) [9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19]. However, unlike ROMs, they are over-parametrized which leads to both generalizability and robustness to noise that is not possible with ROMs, see the recent work of [20].