Main Article Content

I Wayan Pio Pratama

Abstract

This study examines learning-based inversion through the lens of inverse problem theory, focusing on uncertainty propagation, conditioning, and identifiability rather than pointwise prediction accuracy alone. Inverse estimation is formulated as a stochastic mapping in which observational noise is explicitly propagated through learned inverse models. A controlled one-dimensional nonlinear inverse problem is constructed using synthetic forward operators to systematically isolate noise-induced instability and non-uniqueness effects. For an injective nonlinear forward mapping, Support Vector Regression (SVR) with a radial basis function kernel and linear regression are trained to approximate the inverse operator from noisy observations. Monte Carlo noise propagation is employed to estimate bias and variance of inverse predictions and to compare empirical uncertainty amplification with theoretical predictions derived from local inverse conditioning. While SVR significantly outperforms linear regression in terms of inverse accuracy, the results demonstrate that inverse uncertainty is primarily governed by the conditioning of the forward operator and is modulated by model regularization. The analysis is extended to a non-injective forward operator to investigate identifiability loss in learning-based inversion. In this setting, both models collapse inherently multi-valued inverse mappings into unimodal and overconfident estimates, revealing implicit solution selection driven by data distribution and regularization. These findings show that low prediction error can be misleading in non-identifiable inverse problems. Overall, this work highlights the limitations of deterministic learning-based inversion and underscores the need for uncertainty-aware and distribution-preserving approaches when addressing ill-conditioned or non-injective inverse problems.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Pratama, I. W. . P. (2026) “Uncertainty and stability analysis of data-driven inversion using support vector regression”, Jurnal Mantik, 9(4), pp. 1344-1356. doi: 10.35335/mantik.v9i4.6957.
References
Adcock, B., Dexter, N., & Moraga Scheuermann, S. (2024). Optimal deep learning of holomorphic operators between Banach spaces. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2406.13928
Adler, J., & Öktem, O. (2024). Deep Bayesian Inversion. In Data-Driven Models in Inverse Problems (pp. 359–412). De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111251233-011
Arridge, S., Maass, P., Öktem, O., & Schönlieb, C. B. (2019). Solving inverse problems using data-driven models. Acta Numerica, 28, 1–174. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0962492919000059
Bach, E., Baptista, R., Sanz-Alonso, D., & Stuart, A. (2025). Machine Learning for Inverse Problems and Data Assimilation. ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:2410.10523. https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.10523
Bangerth, W., Johnson, C. R., Njeru, D. K., & van Bloemen Waanders, B. (2025). Estimating and using information in inverse problems. Inverse Problems and Imaging. https://doi.org/10.3934/ipi.2026003
Chung, J., & Gazzola, S. (2024). Computational Methods for Large-Scale Inverse Problems: A Survey on Hybrid Projection Methods. SIAM Review, 66(2), 205–284. https://doi.org/10.1137/21M1441420
Engl, H. W., Hanke, M., & Neubauer, A. (2000). Regularization of Inverse Problems. Springer Netherlands. https://books.google.co.id/books?id=VuEV-Gj1GZcC
Gallet, A., Rigby, S., Tallman, T. N., Kong, X., Hajirasouliha, I., Liew, A., Liu, D., Chen, L., Hauptmann, A., & Smyl, D. (2022). Structural engineering from an inverse problems perspective. Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 478(2257), 20210526. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2021.0526
Giraud, J., Lindsay, M., Ogarko, V., Jessell, M., Martin, R., & Pakyuz-Charrier, E. (2019). Integration of geoscientific uncertainty into geophysical inversion by means of local gradient regularization. Solid Earth, 10(1), 193–210. https://doi.org/10.5194/se-10-193-2019
Jessell, M. W., Ailleres, L., & de Kemp, E. A. (2010). Towards an integrated inversion of geoscientific data: What price of geology? Tectonophysics, 490(3), 294–306. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2010.05.020
Ji, K., Shen, Y., Chen, Q., Li, B., & Wang, W. (2022). An Adaptive Regularized Solution to Inverse Ill-Posed Models. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 60, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2022.3205572
Jiang, Q., & Gou, Z. (2025). Solutions to Two? and Three?Dimensional Incompressible Flow Fields Leveraging a Physics?Informed Deep Learning Framework and Kolmogorov–Arnold Networks. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids, 97. https://doi.org/10.1002/fld.5374
Kaipio, J. P., & Somersalo, E. (2005). Statistical and Computational Inverse Problems (1st ed.). Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/b138659
Karniadakis, G. E., Kevrekidis, I. G., Lu, L., Perdikaris, P., Wang, S., & Yang, L. (2021). Physics-informed machine learning. Nature Reviews Physics, 3(6), 422–440. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42254-021-00314-5
Kirsch, A. (2021). An Introduction to the Mathematical Theory of Inverse Problems (3rd ed.). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63343-1
Latz, J. (2020). On the Well-posedness of Bayesian Inverse Problems. SIAM/ASA Journal on Uncertainty Quantification, 8(1), 451–482. https://doi.org/10.1137/19M1247176
Latz, J. (2023). Bayesian Inverse Problems Are Usually Well-Posed. SIAM Review, 65(3), 831–865. https://doi.org/10.1137/23M1556435
Lu, L., Jin, P., Pang, G., Zhang, Z., & Karniadakis, G. E. (2021). Learning Nonlinear Operators via DeepONet Based on the Universal Approximation Theorem of Operators. Nature Machine Intelligence, 3(3), 218–229. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-021-00302-5
Mohammad-Djafari, A., Chu, N., Wang, L., & Yu, L. (2023). Bayesian Inference and Deep Learning for Inverse Problems. Physical Sciences Forum, 9(1), 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/psf2023009014
Ogarko, V., Frankcombe, K., Liu, T., Giraud, J., Martin, R., & Jessell, M. (2024). Tomofast-x 2.0: an open-source parallel code for inversion of potential field data with topography using wavelet compression. Geoscientific Model Development, 17(6), 2325–2345. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2325-2024
Ogarko, V., Giraud, J., Martin, R., & Jessell, M. (2021). Disjoint interval bound constraints using the alternating direction method of multipliers (ADMM) for geologically constrained inversion: Application to gravity data. Geophysics, 86(2), G1–G11. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2019-0633.1
Pakyuz-Charrier, E., Lindsay, M., Ogarko, V., Giraud, J., & Jessell, M. (2018). Monte Carlo simulation for uncertainty estimation on structural data in implicit 3-D geological modeling, a guide for disturbance distribution selection and parameterization. Solid Earth, 9(2), 385–402. https://doi.org/10.5194/se-9-385-2018
Paula, M. C. L., Jessell, M., Cripps, E., Lindsay, M., Pirot, G., & Gibson, L. (2025). Machine learning to assess troglofauna occurrences in the northern part of Western Australia. Next Research, 2(3), 100693. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nexres.2025.100693
Smola, A. J., & Schölkopf, B. (2004). A tutorial on support vector regression. Statistics and Computing, 14(3), 199–222. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:STCO.0000035301.49549.88
Stuart, A. M. (2010). Inverse Problems: A Bayesian Perspective. Acta Numerica, 19, 451–559. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0962492910000061
Tarantola, A. (2005). Inverse Problem Theory and Methods for Model Parameter Estimation. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics. https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9780898717921
Tikhonov, A. N., & Arsenin, V. I. (1977). Solutions of Ill-Posed Problems. Winston.
Vapnik, V. N. (2000). The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory (2nd ed.). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3264-1
Zhai, M., Ji, Y., Pei, R., Xu, L., Chen, Y., & Lu, W. (2025). Transformer-Based PINN for Semisupervised Electromagnetic Forward Simulations. IEEE Antennas and Wireless Propagation Letters, 24(11), 3956–3960. https://doi.org/10.1109/LAWP.2025.3583011
Zong, Y., Barajas-Solano, D., & Tartakovsky, A. M. (2023). Randomized Physics-Informed Machine Learning for Uncertainty Quantification in High-Dimensional Inverse Problems. https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.06177