Accurate characterization of temperature fields and ice thickness evolution is critical for the rapidly changing Arctic sea ice system, when field-based buoy observations remain limited. Building on weak solution theory and solvability analysis for the coupled ice-water two-phase system, a physics-informed neural network (PINN) framework was developed for forward simulation and interface inversion of a Stefan free-boundary problem. The proposed approach enabled the simultaneous reconstruction of temperature fields in phases and identification of the interface trajectory. Methodologically, the framework combined rigorous theoretical analysis, a PINN implementation consistent with physical constraints, and observation-driven validation, thereby providing a systematic procedure for temperature field reconstruction and physically consistent inversion in ice-water two-phase Stefan free-boundary inverse problems. Validation proceeded from equivalent-flux benchmarks to fully coupled two-phase simulations. In the equivalent-flux stage, the water-phase impact on the ice was parameterized by a time-varying equivalent oceanic heat flux. With a three-stage training strategy and a multiplicative correction factor for the conductive flux, the ice temperature error was below 0.5 ℃, and the absolute thickness error was under 2.5 cm. In the coupled stage, hard enforcement of the boundary conditions further stabilized convergence, keeping temperature errors below 0.3 ℃ in both phases and limiting the absolute thickness error to at most 4 cm. These results demonstrated that a physics-constrained PINN can deliver stable and accurate two-phase thermodynamic inversion from limited observations, and they motivate extensions toward a unified atmosphere-snow-ice-ocean inversion framework.
Citation: Yang Liu, Lei Wang, BingYan Gao, XueLing Yi, Peng Lu, Xu Zhang. A physics-informed neural network framework for ice-water two-phase temperature reconstruction and interface inversion in Arctic sea ice[J]. Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization, 2026, 22(4): 1824-1846. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2026067
Accurate characterization of temperature fields and ice thickness evolution is critical for the rapidly changing Arctic sea ice system, when field-based buoy observations remain limited. Building on weak solution theory and solvability analysis for the coupled ice-water two-phase system, a physics-informed neural network (PINN) framework was developed for forward simulation and interface inversion of a Stefan free-boundary problem. The proposed approach enabled the simultaneous reconstruction of temperature fields in phases and identification of the interface trajectory. Methodologically, the framework combined rigorous theoretical analysis, a PINN implementation consistent with physical constraints, and observation-driven validation, thereby providing a systematic procedure for temperature field reconstruction and physically consistent inversion in ice-water two-phase Stefan free-boundary inverse problems. Validation proceeded from equivalent-flux benchmarks to fully coupled two-phase simulations. In the equivalent-flux stage, the water-phase impact on the ice was parameterized by a time-varying equivalent oceanic heat flux. With a three-stage training strategy and a multiplicative correction factor for the conductive flux, the ice temperature error was below 0.5 ℃, and the absolute thickness error was under 2.5 cm. In the coupled stage, hard enforcement of the boundary conditions further stabilized convergence, keeping temperature errors below 0.3 ℃ in both phases and limiting the absolute thickness error to at most 4 cm. These results demonstrated that a physics-constrained PINN can deliver stable and accurate two-phase thermodynamic inversion from limited observations, and they motivate extensions toward a unified atmosphere-snow-ice-ocean inversion framework.
| [1] |
J. Overland, E. Dunlea, J. E. Box, R. Corell, M. Forsius, V. Kattsov, et al., The urgency of Arctic change, Polar Sci., 21 (2019), 6–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.polar.2018.11.008 doi: 10.1016/j.polar.2018.11.008
|
| [2] |
A. G. Dai, D. H. Luo, M. R. Song, J. P. Liu, Arctic amplification is caused by sea-ice loss under increasing CO2, Nat. Commun., 10 (2019), 121. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07954-9 doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-07954-9
|
| [3] |
D. K. Perovich, C. Polashenski, Albedo evolution of seasonal Arctic sea ice, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39 (2012), L08501. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2012GL051432 doi: 10.1029/2012GL051432
|
| [4] |
R. A. Pedersen, I. Cvijanovic, P. L. Langen, B. M. Vinther, The impact of regional arctic sea ice loss on atmospheric circulation and the NAO, J. Climate, 29 (2016), 889–902. https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0315.1 doi: 10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0315.1
|
| [5] |
J. C. Stroeve, V. Kattsov, A. Barrett, M. Serreze, T. Pavlova, M. Holland, et al., Trends in Arctic sea ice extent from CMIP5, CMIP3 and observations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39 (2012), L16502. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2012GL052676 doi: 10.1029/2012GL052676
|
| [6] |
D. Notz, J. Stroeve, Observed arctic sea-ice loss directly follows anthropogenic CO2 emission, Science, 354 (2016), 747–750. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.aag2345 doi: 10.1126/science.aag2345
|
| [7] |
R. Kwok, G. F. Cunningham, Contribution of melt in the Beaufort Sea to the decline in Arctic multiyear sea ice coverage: 1993–2009, Geophys. Res. Lett., 37 (2010), L20501. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2010GL044678 doi: 10.1029/2010GL044678
|
| [8] |
H. Sumata, L. Steur, D. V. Divine, M. A. Granskog, S. Gerland, Regime shift in Arctic Ocean sea ice thickness, Nature, 615 (2023), 443–449. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05686-x doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-05686-x
|
| [9] |
L. Albedyll, C. H. W. Dierking, Thermodynamic and dynamic contributions to seasonal Arctic sea ice thickness distributions from airborne observations, Elem. Sci. Anth., 10 (2022), 74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/elementa.2021.00074 doi: 10.1525/elementa.2021.00074
|
| [10] |
I. A. Raphael, D. K. Perovich, C. M. Polashenski, D. Clemens-Sewall, P. Itkin, R. Lei, et al., Sea ice mass balance during the MOSAiC drift experiment: Results from manual ice and snow thickness gauges, Elem. Sci. Anth., 12 (2024), 40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/elementa.2023.00040 doi: 10.1525/elementa.2023.00040
|
| [11] |
R. B. Lei, N. Li, P. Heil, B. Cheng, Z. H. Zhang, B. Sun, Multiyear sea-ice thermal regimes and oceanic heat flux derived from an ice mass balance buoy in the Arctic Ocean, J. Geophys. Res. Oceans, 119 (2014), 537–547. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/2012JC008731 doi: 10.1002/2012JC008731
|
| [12] |
E. Carmack, I. Polyakov, L. Padman, I. FER, E. Hunke, J. Hutchings, et al., Toward quantifying the increasing role of oceanic heat in sea ice loss in the new arctic, Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 96 (2015), 2079–2105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00177.1 doi: 10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00177.1
|
| [13] |
J. A. Richter-Menge, D. K. Perovich, B. C. Elder, K. Claffey, I. Rigor, M. Ortmeyer, Ice mass-balance buoys: a tool for measuring and attributing changes in the thickness of the Arctic sea-ice cover, Ann. Glaciol., 44 (2006), 205–210. http://dx.doi.org/10.3189/172756406781811727 doi: 10.3189/172756406781811727
|
| [14] |
R. L. Tilling, A. Ridout, A. Shepherd, Estimating Arctic sea ice thickness and volume using CryoSat-2 radar altimeter data, Adv. Space Res., 62 (2018), 1203–1225. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2017.10.051 doi: 10.1016/j.asr.2017.10.051
|
| [15] |
K. Jackson, J. Wilkinson, T. Maksym, D. Meldrum, J. Beckers, C. Haas, et al., A novel and low-cost sea ice mass balance buoy, J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 30 (2013), 2676–2688. http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-13-00058.1 doi: 10.1175/JTECH-D-13-00058.1
|
| [16] |
R. Kwok, G. F. Cunningham, ICES at over Arctic sea ice: Estimation of snow depth and ice thickness, J. Geophys. Res., 113 (2008), C08010. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2008JC004753 doi: 10.1029/2008JC004753
|
| [17] |
S. Kacimi, R. Kwok, Arctic snow depth, ice thickness, and volume from ICESat-2 and CryoSat-2: 2018–2021, Geophys. Res. Lett., 49 (2022), e2021GL097448. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2021GL097448 doi: 10.1029/2021GL097448
|
| [18] |
J. C. Landy, A. A. Petty, M. Tsamados, J. C. Stroeve, Sea ice roughness overlooked as a key source of uncertainty in CryoSat-2 ice freeboard retrievals, J. Geophys. Res. Oceans, 125 (2020), e2019JC015820. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2019JC015820 doi: 10.1029/2019JC015820
|
| [19] |
M. Li, C. Ke, B. Cheng, J. Ma, H. Jiang, X. Shen, Inter-comparisons of Arctic snow depth products, Int. J. Digit. Earth, 17 (2024), 2376286. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17538947.2024.2376286 doi: 10.1080/17538947.2024.2376286
|
| [20] |
A. K. Turner, E. C. Hunke, Impacts of a mushy-layer thermodynamic approach in global sea-ice simulations using the CICE sea-ice model, J. Geophys. Res. Oceans, 120 (2015), 1253–1275. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/2014JC010358 doi: 10.1002/2014JC010358
|
| [21] |
Y. J. Fang, T. W. Wu, A. X. Hu, M. Chu, A modified thermodynamic sea ice model and its application, Ocean Model., 178 (2022), 102096. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ocemod.2022.102096 doi: 10.1016/j.ocemod.2022.102096
|
| [22] |
A. F. Roberts, E. C. Hunke, R. Allard, D. A. Bailey, A. P. Craig, J. F. Lemieux, et al., Quality control for community-based sea-ice model development, Philos. Trans. Royal Soc. A, 376 (2018), 20170344. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2017.0344 doi: 10.1098/rsta.2017.0344
|
| [23] |
L. Yu, J. P. Liu, Y. Q. Gao, Q. Shu, A sensitivity study of arctic ice-ocean heat exchange to the three-equation boundary condition parametrization in CICE6, Adv. Atmos. Sci., 39 (2022), 1398–1416. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00376-022-1316-y doi: 10.1007/s00376-022-1316-y
|
| [24] |
F. G. Gu, F. Kauker, Q. H. Yang, B. Han, Y. J. Fang, C. W. Liu, Effects of freezing temperature parameterization on simulated sea-ice thickness validated by MOSAiC observations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 51 (2024), e2024GL108281. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2024GL108281 doi: 10.1029/2024GL108281
|
| [25] |
P. Nanda, G. M. M. Reddy, M. Vynnycky, Inverse two-phase nonlinear stefan and cauchy-stefan problems: A phase-wise approach, Comput. Math. Appl., 123 (2022), 216–226. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.camwa.2022.08.009 doi: 10.1016/j.camwa.2022.08.009
|
| [26] |
C. Ghanmi, S. Mani Aouadi, F. Triki, Recovering the initial condition in the one-phase Stefan problem, Discrete Cont. Dyn. Syst. S, 15 (2022), 1143–1164. http://dx.doi.org/10.3934/dcdss.2021087 doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2021087
|
| [27] |
M. Raissi, P. Perdikaris, G. E. Karniadakis, Physics-informed neural networks: A deep learning framework for solving forward and inverse problems involving nonlinear partial differential equations, J. Comput. Phys., 378 (2019), 686–707. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2018.10.045 doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2018.10.045
|
| [28] |
M. Someya, T. Furumura, Physics-informed neural networks for offshore tsunami data assimilation, Geophys. J. Int., 242 (2025), ggaf243. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggaf243 doi: 10.1093/gji/ggaf243
|
| [29] |
M. Heinkenschloss, D. P. Kouri, Optimization problems governed by systems of PDEs with uncertainties, Acta Numer., 34 (2025), 1–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0962492925000029 doi: 10.1017/S0962492925000029
|
| [30] |
S. Nabi, P. Grover, C. P. Caulfield, Robust preconditioned one-shot methods and direct-adjoint-looping for optimizing Reynolds-averaged turbulent flows, Comput. Fluids, 238 (2022), 105390. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compfluid.2022.105390 doi: 10.1016/j.compfluid.2022.105390
|
| [31] |
S. Cuomo, V. S. D. Cola, F. Giampaolo, G. Rozza, M. Raissi, F. Piccialli, Scientific machine learning through physics-informed neural networks: Where we are and what's next, J. Sci. Comput., 92 (2022), 88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10915-022-01939-z doi: 10.1007/s10915-022-01939-z
|
| [32] |
G. E. Karniadakis, I. G. Kevrekidis, L. Lu, P. Perdikaris, S. Wang, L. Yang, Physics-informed machine learning, Nat. Rev. Phys., 3 (2021), 422–440. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s42254-021-00314-5 doi: 10.1038/s42254-021-00314-5
|
| [33] |
S. F. Wang, X. L. Yu, P. Perdikaris, When and why PINNs fail to train: A neural tangent kernel perspective, J. Comput. Phys., 449 (2022), 110768. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2021.110768 doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2021.110768
|
| [34] |
A. D. Jagtap, E. Kharazmi, G. E. Karniadakis, Conservative physics-informed neural networks on discrete domains for conservation laws: Applications to forward and inverse problems, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 365 (2020), 113028. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2020.113028 doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2020.113028
|
| [35] |
S. Berrone, C. Canuto, M. Pintore, N. Sukumar, Enforcing Dirichlet boundary conditions in physics-informed neural networks and variational physics-informed neural networks, Heliyon, 9 (2023), e18820. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e18820 doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e18820
|
| [36] |
T. M. Yang, Z. H. Qian, N. Z. Hang, M. B. Liu, S-PINN: Stabilized physics-informed neural networks for alleviating barriers between multi-level co-optimization, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 447 (2025), 118348. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2025.118348 doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2025.118348
|
| [37] |
S. F. Wang, P. Perdikaris, Deep learning of free boundary and Stefan problems, J. Comput. Phys., 428 (2021), 109914. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2020.109914 doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2020.109914
|
| [38] | H. Brezis, Functional analysis, sobolev spaces and partial differential equations, Springer, 2011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-70914-7 |
| [39] | J. L. Lions, E. Magenes, Non-homogeneous boundary value problems and applications, Springer, 1972. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-65161-8 |
| [40] |
W. Lv, E. Feng, Z. J. Li, A coupled thermodynamic system of sea ice and its parameter identification, Appl. Math. Model., 32 (2008), 1198–1207. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2007.03.006 doi: 10.1016/j.apm.2007.03.006
|
| [41] | B. Dacorogna, Direct methods in the calculus of variations, Springer, 2008. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-55249-1 |
| [42] | A. Granas, J. Dugundji, Fixed point theory, Springer, 2003. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-21593-8 |
| [43] |
R. B. Lei, M. Hoppmann, B. Cheng, G. Y. Zuo, J. Zhao, L. Lin, et al., Seasonality and timing of sea ice mass balance and heat fluxes in the Arctic transpolar drift during 2019–2020, Elem. Sci. Anth., 10 (2022), 89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/elementa.2021.000089 doi: 10.1525/elementa.2021.000089
|
| [44] |
D. J. Pringle, H. Eicken, H. J. Trodahl, L. G. E. Backstrom, Thermal conductivity of landfast Antarctic and Arctic sea ice, J. Geophys. Res., 112 (2007), C04017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2006JC003641 doi: 10.1029/2006JC003641
|
| [45] |
A. M. Tartakovsky, C. O. Marrero, P. Perdikaris, G. D. Tartakovsky, D. Barajas-Solano, Physics-informed deep neural networks for learning parameters and constitutive relationships in subsurface flow problems, Water Resour. Res., 56 (2020), e2019WR026731. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2019WR026731 doi: 10.1029/2019WR026731
|
| [46] |
S. F. Wang, Y. J. Teng, P. Perdikaris, Understanding and mitigating gradient flow pathologies in physics-informed neural networks, SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 43 (2021), A3055–A3081. http://dx.doi.org/10.1137/20M1318043 doi: 10.1137/20M1318043
|
| [47] |
N. Sukumar, A. Srivastava, Exact imposition of boundary conditions with distance functions in physics-informed deep neural networks, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 389 (2022), 114333. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2021.114333 doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2021.114333
|