Jumper, J. et al. Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold. Nature 596, 583–589 (2021).
Guastoni, L., Rabault, J., Schlatter, P., Azizpour, H. & Vinuesa, R. Deep reinforcement learning for turbulent drag reduction in channel flows. Eur. Phys. J. E 46, 27 (2023).
Lundberg, S. M. & Lee, S.-I. A unified approach to interpreting model predictions. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30, (2017).
Rudin, C. Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high-stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead. Nat. Mach. Intell. 1, 206–215 (2019).
Camps-Valls, G. et al. Discovering causal relations and equations from data. Phys. Rep. 1044, 1–68 (2023).
Carloni, G., Berti, A. & Colantonio, S. The role of causality in explainable artificial intelligence. WIREs Data Mining Knowl Discov. 15, e70015 (2025).
Cremades, A., Hoyas, S. & Vinuesa, R. Classically studied coherent structures only paint a partial picture of wall-bounded turbulence. Nat. Commun. (2025).
Pearl, J. Causality (Cambridge University Press, 2009).
Peters, J., Janzing, D. & Scholkopf, B. Elements of Causal Inference: Foundations and Learning Algorithms. (MIT Press, 2017).
Martínez-Sánchez, A., Arranz, G. & Lozano-Durán, A. Decomposing causality into its synergistic, unique, and redundant components. Nat. Commun. 15, 9296 (2024).
Sundararajan, M., Taly, A. & Yan, Q. Axiomatic attribution for deep networks. Proc. 34th Int. Conf. Mach. Learn. 70, 3319–3328 (2017).
Schölkopf, B. et al. On causal and anticausal learning. CML’12: Proceedings of the 29th International Coference on International Conference on Machine Learning. 459–466 (2012).
Peters, J., Bühlmann, P. & Meinshausen, N. Causal inference by using invariant prediction: identification and confidence intervals. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B: Stat. Methodol. 78, 947–1012 (2016).
Bühlmann, P. Invariance, causality and robustness. Stat. Sci. 35, 404–426 (2020).
Schölkopf, B. Causality for machine learning. Probabilistic and causal inference: The works of Judea Pearl. 765–804 (2022).
Schölkopf, B. et al. Toward causal representation learning. Proc. IEEE 109, 612–634 (2021).
Binkyte, R. et al. Trustworthy AI suffers from invariance conflicts, and causality is the solution. Preprint at arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.02640 (2026).
Wei, J. et al. Xai4extremes: An interpretable machine learning framework for understanding extreme-weather precursors under climate change. Tackling Climate Change with Machine Learning (ICLR. 2025).
Camps-Valls, G. et al. Artificial intelligence for modeling and understanding extreme weather and climate events. Nat. Commun. 16, 1919 (2025).
Yang, L. et al. Diffusion models: a comprehensive survey of methods and applications. ACM Comput. Surv. 56, 1–39 (2023).
Ameisen, E. et al. Circuit tracing: revealing computational graphs in language models. Transformer Circuits Thread (2025).
Mengaldo, G. Explain the black box for the sake of science: the scientific method in the era of generative artificial intelligence. Preprint at arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2406.10557 (2024).
Turbé, H., Bjelogrlic, M., Lovis, C. & Mengaldo, G. Evaluation of post-hoc interpretability methods in time-series classification. Nat. Mach. Intell. 5, 250–260 (2023).
Wei, J., Turbé, H. & Mengaldo, G. Revisiting the robustness of post-hoc interpretability methods. Preprint at arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv:2407.19683 (2024).
Bommer, P. L., Kretschmer, M., Hedström, A., Bareeva, D. & Höhne, M. M.-C. Finding the right XAI method—a guide for the evaluation and ranking of explainable AI methods in climate science. Artif. Intell. Earth Syst. 3, e230074 (2024).
Mamalakis, A., Barnes, E. A. & Ebert-Uphoff, I. Investigation of the fidelity of explainable artificial intelligence methods in applications of convolutional neural networks in geoscience. Artif. Intell. Earth Syst. 1, e220012 (2022).
Mamalakis, A., Ebert-Uphoff, I. & Barnes, E. A. Neural network attribution methods for problems in geoscience: a novel synthetic benchmark dataset. Environ. Data Sci. https://doi.org/10.1017/eds.2022.7 (2022).
Mamalakis, A., Ebert-Uphoff, I. & Barnes, E. A. in Explainable artificial intelligence in meteorology and climate science: Model fine-tuning, calibrating trust, and learning new science. (eds Holzinger, A. et al.) xxAI—Beyond Explainable AI: International Workshop, Held in Conjunction with ICML 2020, July 18, 2020, Vienna, Austria, Revised and Extended Papers Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Springer, Cham, 2022).
Brunton, S. L., Proctor, J. L. & Kutz, J. N. Discovering governing equations from data by sparse identification of nonlinear dynamical systems. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 113, 3932–3937 (2016).
Cranmer, M. Interpretable machine learning for science with PySR and symbolic regression. Preprint at arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2305.01582 (2023).
Vinuesa, R. et al. Decoding complexity: how machine learning is redefining scientific discovery. Preprint at Commun. Phys. 9, 168 (2026).
Noé, F., Tkatchenko, A., Müller, K.-R. & Clementi, C. Machine learning for molecular simulation. Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. 71, 361–390 (2020).
Baek, M. & Baker, D. Deep learning and protein structure modeling. Nat. Methods 19, 13–14 (2022).
Degrave, J. et al. Magnetic control of tokamak plasmas through deep reinforcement learning. Nature 602, 414–419 (2022).
Tamayo, D. et al. Predicting the long-term stability of compact multiplanet systems. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 117, 18194–18205 (2020).
Parker, L. et al. Astroclip: a cross-modal foundation model for galaxies. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 531, 4990–5011 (2024).
Angeloudi, E. et al. The multimodal universe: enabling large-scale machine learning with 100 tb of astronomical scientific data. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 37, 57841–57913 (2024).
Ling, J., Kurzawski, A. & Templeton, J. Reynolds averaged turbulence modelling using deep neural networks with embedded invariance. J. Fluid Mech. 807, 155–166 (2016).
Loiseau, J.-C. & Brunton, S. L. Constrained sparse Galerkin regression. J. Fluid Mech. 838, 42–67 (2018).
Fukami, K., Goto, S. & Taira, K. Data-driven nonlinear turbulent flow scaling with Buckingham Pi variables. J. Fluid Mech. 984, R4 (2024).
Brunton, S. L., Zolman, N., Kutz, J. N. & Fasel, U. Machine learning for sparse nonlinear modeling and control. Annu. Rev. Control Robot. Auton. Syst. 8, 127–152 (2025).
Bongard, J. & Lipson, H. Automated reverse engineering of nonlinear dynamical systems. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 104, 9943–9948 (2007).
Schmidt, M. & Lipson, H. Distilling free-form natural laws from experimental data. Science 324, 81–85 (2009).
Petersen, B. K. Deep symbolic regression: Recovering mathematical expressions from data via policy gradients. Preprint at arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1912.04871 (2019).
Vaddireddy, H. & San, O. Equation discovery using fast function extraction: a deterministic symbolic regression approach. Fluids 4, 111 (2019).
Udrescu, S.-M. & Tegmark, M. AI Feynman: a physics-inspired method for symbolic regression. Sci. Adv. 6, eaay2631 (2020).
Zolman, N., Fasel, U., Kutz, J. N. & Brunton, S. L. SINDy-RL: interpretable and efficient model-based reinforcement learning. Nat. Commun. 16, 10714 (2025).
Kaptanoglu, A. A., Callaham, J. L., Hansen, C. J., Aravkin, A. & Brunton, S. L. Promoting global stability in data-driven models of quadratic nonlinear dynamics. Phys. Rev. Fluids 6, 094401 (2021).
Otto, S. E., Zolman, N., Kutz, J. N. & Brunton, S. L. A unified framework to enforce, discover, and promote symmetry in machine learning. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 26, 1–83 (2025).
Rudy, S. H., Brunton, S. L., Proctor, J. L. & Kutz, J. N. Data-driven discovery of partial differential equations. Sci. Adv. 3, e1602614 (2017).
Schaeffer, H. Learning partial differential equations via data discovery and sparse optimization. Proc. R. Soc. A 473, 20160446 (2017).
Messenger, D. A. & Bortz, D. M. Weak sindy for partial differential equations. J. Comput. Phys. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2021.110525 (2021).
Reinbold, P. A., Kageorge, L. M., Schatz, M. F. & Grigoriev, R. O. Robust learning from noisy, incomplete, high-dimensional experimental data via physically constrained symbolic regression. Nat. Commun. 12, 1–8 (2021).
Fasel, U., Kutz, J. N., Brunton, B. W. & Brunton, S. L. Ensemble-sindy: Robust sparse model discovery in the low-data, high-noise limit, with active learning and control. Proc. R. Soc. A. 478, 20210904 (2022).
Beetham, S. & Capecelatro, J. Formulating turbulence closures using sparse regression with embedded form invariance. Phys. Rev. Fluids 5, 084611 (2020).
Beetham, S., Fox, R. O. & Capecelatro, J. Sparse identification of multiphase turbulence closures for coupled fluid–particle flows. Journal of Fluid Mechanics https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2021.53 (2021).
Schmelzer, M., Dwight, R. P. & Cinnella, P. Discovery of algebraic Reynolds-stress models using sparse symbolic regression. Flow, Turbulence Combust. 104, 579–603 (2020).
Alves, E. P. & Fiuza, F. Data-driven discovery of reduced plasma physics models from fully-kinetic simulations. Phys. Rev. Research 4, 033192 (2022).
Supekar, R. et al. Learning hydrodynamic equations for active matter from particle simulations and experiments. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 120, e2206994120 (2023).
Zanna, L. & Bolton, T. Data-driven equation discovery of ocean mesoscale closures. Geophys. Res. Lett. 47, e2020GL088376 (2020).
Long, Z., Lu, Y. & Dong, B. Pde-net 2.0: Learning PDEs from data with a numeric-symbolic hybrid deep network. J. Comput. Phys. 399, 108925 (2019).
Kingma, D. P. & Welling, M. Auto-encoding variational Bayes. Preprint at arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1312.6114 (2013).
Lusch, B., Kutz, J. N. & Brunton, S. L. Deep learning for universal linear embeddings of nonlinear dynamics. Nat. Commun. 9, 4950 (2018).
Champion, K., Lusch, B., Kutz, J. N. & Brunton, S. L. Data-driven discovery of coordinates and governing equations. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 116, 22445–22451 (2019).
Lee, K. & Carlberg, K. T. Model reduction of dynamical systems on nonlinear manifolds using deep convolutional autoencoders. J. Comput. Phys. 404, 108973 (2020).
Conti, P., Gobat, G., Fresca, S., Manzoni, A. & Frangi, A. Reduced order modeling of parametrized systems through autoencoders and sindy approach: continuation of periodic solutions. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 411, 116072 (2023).
Mounayer, J., Rodriguez, S., Ghnatios, C., Farhat, C. & Chinesta, F. Rank reduction autoencoders–enhancing interpolation on nonlinear manifolds. Preprint at arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2405.13980 (2024).
Brunton, S. L. & Kutz, J. N.Data-Driven Science and Engineering: Machine Learning, Dynamical Systems, and Control 2nd edn (Cambridge University Press, 2022).
Bakarji, J., Champion, K., Nathan Kutz, J. & Brunton, S. L. Discovering governing equations from partial measurements with deep delay autoencoders. Proc. R. Soc. A 479, 20230422 (2023).
Takeishi, N., Kawahara, Y. & Yairi, T. Learning Koopman invariant subspaces for dynamic mode decomposition (2017).
Yeung, E., Kundu, S. & Hodas, N. Learning deep neural network representations for Koopman operators of nonlinear dynamical systems. In Proccedings of American Control Conference (ACC) (Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2019).
Wehmeyer, C. & Noé, F. Time-lagged autoencoders: Deep learning of slow collective variables for molecular kinetics. J. Chem. Phys. 148, 1–9 (2018).
Mardt, A., Pasquali, L., Wu, H. & Noé, F. VAMPnets: deep learning of molecular kinetics. Nat. Commun. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-02388-1 (2018).
Otto, S. E. & Rowley, C. W. Linearly-recurrent autoencoder networks for learning dynamics. SIAM J. Appl. Dyn. Syst. 18, 558–593 (2019).
Locatello, F. et al. Challenging common assumptions in the unsupervised learning of disentangled representations, 4114–4124 (PMLR, 2019).
Lachapelle, S. et al. Nonparametric partial disentanglement via mechanism sparsity: Sparse actions, interventions and sparse temporal dependencies. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 27, 1–90 (2026).
Lippe, P. et al. Citris: Causal identifiability from temporal intervened sequences, 13557–13603 (PMLR, 2022).
Cranmer, M. et al. Disentangled sparsity networks for explainable AI. (2021).
Noé, F., Olsson, S., Köhler, J. & Wu, H. Boltzmann generators: Sampling equilibrium states of many-body systems with deep learning. Science 365, eaaw1147 (2019).
Greydanus, S., Dzamba, M. & Yosinski, J. Hamiltonian neural networks. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 32, 15379–15389 (2019).
Cranmer, M. et al. Lagrangian neural networks. Preprint at arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2003.04630 (2020).
Miller, B. K., Geiger, M., Smidt, T. E. & Noé, F. Relevance of rotationally equivariant convolutions for predicting molecular properties. Preprint at arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2008.08461 (2020).
Batzner, S. et al. E (3)-equivariant graph neural networks for data-efficient and accurate interatomic potentials. Nat. Commun. 13, 2453 (2022).
Brandstetter, J., Berg, R. v. d., Welling, M. & Gupta, J. K. Clifford neural layers for PDE modeling. In International Conference on Learning Representations https://mlanthology.org/iclr/2023/brandstetter2023iclr-clifford/ (2023).
Brandstetter, J., Welling, M. & Worrall, D. E. Lie point symmetry data augmentation for neural PDE solvers. International Conference on Machine Learning 2241–2256 (2022).
Du, P., Parikh, M. H., Fan, X., Liu, X. & Wang, J. Conditional neural field latent diffusion model for generating spatiotemporal turbulence. Nat. Commun. 15, 10416 (2024).
Solera-Rico, A. et al. β-Variational autoencoders and transformers for reduced-order modelling of fluid flows. Nat. Commun. 15, 1361 (2024).
Mnih, V. et al. Human-level control through deep reinforcement learning. Nature 518, 529–533 (2015).
Lillicrap, T. P. et al. Continuous control with deep reinforcement learning. Preprint at arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1509.02971 (2015).
Erion, G., Janizek, J. D., Sturmfels, P., Lundberg, S. M. & Lee, S.-I. Improving performance of deep learning models with axiomatic attribution priors and expected gradients. Nat. Mach. Intell. 3, 620–631 (2021).
Martins, J. R. R. A. & Lambe, A. B. Multidisciplinary design optimization: a survey of architectures. AIAA J. 51, 2049–2075 (2013).
Jameson, A. Aerodynamic design via control theory. J. Sci. Comput. 3, 233–260 (1988).
Shapley, L. S. et al. A value for n-person games (1953).
Simonyan, K., Vedaldi, A. & Zisserman, A. Deep inside convolutional networks: Visualizing image classification models and saliency maps. Preprint at arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1312.6034 (2013).
Cremades, A. et al. Identifying regions of importance in wall-bounded turbulence through explainable deep learning. Nat. Commun. 15, 3864 (2024).
Larrañaga, A., Sandberg, R. D., Martínez, J. & Porteiro, J. On the machine learning-assisted identification of the fundamental parameters of nonstandard microfin arrays to assess their heat transfer performance. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 136, 108945 (2024).
Zhao, P. et al. A machine learning and CFD modeling hybrid approach for predicting real-time heat transfer during cokemaking processes. Fuel 373, 132273 (2024).
Singh, S., Suman, S., Kumar, M. & Mitra, S. Ann model for prediction of thermo-hydraulic performance of a solar air heater with vertical cylindrical ribs. Energy Rep. 8, 585–592 (2022).
Verma, S., Novati, G. & Koumoutsakos, P. Efficient collective swimming by harnessing vortices through deep reinforcement learning. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 115, 5849–5854 (2018).
Vishwasrao, A. et al. Diff-sport: Diffusion-based sensor placement optimization and reconstruction of turbulent flows in urban environments. Preprint at arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2506.00214 (2025).
Beneitez, M., Cremades, A., Guastoni, L. & Vinuesa, R. Improving turbulence control through explainable deep learning. Preprint at arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2504.02354 (2025).
Heaton, H. & Wu Fung, S. Explainable AI via learning to optimize. Sci. Rep. 13, 10103 (2023).
Murray, B. et al. Explainable AI for understanding decisions and data-driven optimization of the Choquet integral. 2018 IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems. (FUZZ-IEEE) (2018).
Shen, Y., Huang, W., Wang, Z. & Xu, D. F. An automatic visible explainer of geometric knowledge for aeroshape design optimization based on SHAP. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 127, 107800 (2022).
Hinton, G. E. & Salakhutdinov, R. R. Reducing the dimensionality of data with neural networks. Science 313, 504–507 (2006).
Higgins, I. et al. beta-VAE: learning basic visual concepts with a constrained variational framework. International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) (2017).
Arranz, G. & Lozano-Durán, A. Informative and non-informative decomposition of turbulent flow fields. J. Fluid Mech. 1000, A95 (2024).
Chen, M. et al. Explainable machine learning model for load-deformation correlation in long-span suspension bridges using XGBoost-SHAP. Dev. Built Environ. 20, 100569 (2024).
Chung, W. T., Mishra, A. A. & Ihme, M. Interpretable data-driven methods for subgrid-scale closure in les for transcritical LOX/GCH4 combustion. Combust. Flame 239, 111758 (2022).
Sanchis-Agudo, M. et al. Easy attention: A simple attention mechanism for temporal predictions with transformers. APL Comput. Phys. 1, 016104 (2025).
Bommasani, R. et al. On the opportunities and risks of foundation models. Preprint at arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2108.07258 (2022).
Gottweis, J. et al. Towards an AI co-scientist. Nature 655, 487–496 (2026).
Vinuesa, R., Manchón, P., Hoyas, S. & García-Martínez, J. Balancing ai and human insights in scientific discovery: Challenges and guidelines. Innovation 7, 101144 (2026).
Wadell, A. et al. Foundation models for discovery and exploration in chemical space. Preprint at arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2510.18900 (2025).
Carreon, A., Sharma, V. & Raman, V. Automated design optimization via strategic search with large language models. Preprint at arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2511.22651 (2025).
Administration, F. A. Summary of the FAA’s Review of the Boeing 737MAX. Tech. Rep. https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/2022-08/737_RTS_Summary.pdf (2020).
Wang, X. et al. Condensnet: Enabling stable long-term climate simulations via hybrid deep learning models with adaptive physical constraints. npj Climate and Atmospheric Science (2025).
Bostrom, N.Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies (Oxford University Press, 2014).
Wei, J., Verona, E., Bertolini, A. & Mengaldo, G. Explainability matters: The effect of liability rules on the healthcare sector. Preprint at arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2509.17334 (2025).
Vinuesa, R. & Sirmacek, B. Interpretable deep-learning models to help achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Nat. Mach. Intell. 3, 926 (2021).
Selbst, A. D. & Barocas, S. The intuitive appeal of explainable machines. Fordham L. Rev. 87, 1085–1139 (2018).
Krenn, M. et al. On scientific understanding with artificial intelligence. Nat. Rev. Phys. 4, 761–769 (2022).
Gamella, J. L., Peters, J. & Bühlmann, P. Causal chambers as a real-world physical testbed for AI methodology. Nat. Mach. Intell. 7, 107–118 (2025).