Researches

Detailed benchmark results across eight scientific domains. Same cognitive architecture — rigorously evaluated with traceable, reproducible evidence.

Drift-wave turbulence governs cross-field particle and energy transport in tokamak edge plasmas. We benchmark UCogNet's cognitive controller against classical baselines (PID, MPC) and three 2026 neural-operator surrogates on the Hasegawa-Wakatani 2D model — the standard testbed for resistive drift-wave dynamics.

🔬

Hasegawa-Wakatani 2D

Pseudo-spectral solver
Grid

128 × 128

Domain

L = 40

Adiabatic

α = 0.1

Gradient

κ = 0.5

Viscosity

ν = 0.005

Diffusion

D = 0.005

Timestep

dt = 0.005

Steps

1 000 + 200 warmup

📐

7D Composite Metric

Lower = better

Energy stability

20 %

🌊

Flux reduction

20 %

🌀

Enstrophy control

15 %

📊

Spectral fidelity

15 %

🔄

Zonal flow fraction

10 %

⏱️

Correlation time

10 %

🔒

Confinement

10 %

🏆

Single-Seed Ranking

Seed 42 · 8 controllers
#ControllerComposite v3Spectral fid.
🥇FNO Surrogate[Li'21]0.71870.922
🥈UCogNet Legacy0.72530.927
🥉NeuOp-Transformer2026[vdW'26]0.72930.835
4.FI-Conv2026[Chen'26]0.73470.867
5.UCogNet Enhanced0.74350.844
6.UCogNet Ω20260.74900.819
7.PID0.75850.822
8.MPC0.76450.789

UCogNet Legacy ranks 2nd on this single run (seed = 42) with highest spectral fidelity (0.927). ✱ FNO, FI-Conv, NeuOp-Transformer are analytical surrogate implementations — not trained model checkpoints from those papers. See multi-seed table for statistical summary.

🎲

Multi-Seed Robustness

6 seeds · 95% CI (t-dist., n=6)
ControllerMean ± 95% CIWins
UCogNet EnhancedBEST0.7219 ± 0.0153/6
NeuOp-Transformer‡0.7285 ± 0.0050/6
UCogNet Legacy0.7311 ± 0.0222/6
UCogNet Ω0.7400 ± 0.0161/6

UCogNet Enhanced: lowest observed mean (0.7219 ± 0.015). CIs overlap for all pairs; no pairwise difference is statistically significant (e.g. Enhanced vs Legacy: t = −0.779, p = 0.471, n = 6). Win count (3/6) is descriptive.

References[Li'21] Li et al., "Fourier Neural Operator for Parametric PDEs," ICLR 2021.[Chen'26] Chen et al., "Frame-Independent Convolution for Turbulence," arXiv:2602.04287, 2026. (surrogate approx.)[vdW'26] van de Wetering & Zhu, "Neural Operator Transformers for Modified HW," arXiv:2603.05730, 2026. (surrogate approx.)[HW83] Hasegawa & Wakatani, "Plasma Edge Turbulence," Phys. Rev. Lett. 50:682, 1983.[Ca95] Camargo et al., "Resistive drift-wave turbulence," Phys. Plasmas 2:48, 1995.[Ash26] Ashourvan, "GKFieldFlow — Gyrokinetic Field Regression," arXiv:2601.02614, 2026.[‡ note] Neural operator baselines (FNO, FI-Conv, NeuOp-Transformer) are analytical surrogate implementations matching the architectural families of the cited papers — not trained model checkpoints. Results cannot be directly compared to numbers in the cited papers without replication of their training.