IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/reensy/v271y2026ics0951832026000293.html

From physics to machine learning and back: Part I - Learning with inductive biases in prognostics and health management (PHM)

Author

Listed:
  • Fink, Olga
  • Sharma, Vinay
  • Nejjar, Ismail
  • Von Krannichfeldt, Leandro
  • Garmaev, Sergei
  • Zhang, Zepeng
  • Wei, Amaury
  • Frusque, Gaetan
  • Forest, Florent
  • Zhao, Mengjie
  • Hsu, Chi-Ching
  • Faghih Niresi, Keivan
  • Sun, Han
  • Dong, Hao
  • Xu, Chenghao
  • Theiler, Raffael
  • Bizzi, Arthur
  • Steiner, Kevin

Abstract

Prognostics and Health Management (PHM) is essential for ensuring the safe, reliable, and efficient operation of complex engineered systems by integrating fault detection, diagnostics, and prognostics into a unified framework. While machine learning (ML) has significantly advanced PHM by enabling data-driven decision-making, real-world challenges such as sparse or noisy data, limited labels, and complex degradation dynamics require approaches that go beyond purely data-driven modeling. This review focuses on inductive bias – the integration of prior knowledge, physical laws, and structural assumptions into ML model design – as a foundational mechanism to improve generalization, robustness, and interpretability in PHM. We explore the current state of the art in applying inductive bias to PHM, reviewing a wide range of methods including graph neural networks (relational biases), state-space models and neural ordinary differential equations (temporal biases), signal processing-inspired learning (spectral biases), neural operators (operator biases), causal representation learning (causal biases), and interpretable-by-design models (interpretability biases) through the use of inductive bias. For each method, we discuss its advantages, limitations, and suitability for different PHM tasks, and identify emerging applications where these techniques show strong potential. Furthermore, we examine how ML contributes back to physics understanding through symbolic regression (rediscovering physical laws) and post-hoc interpretation (transparent decision-making), closing the loop between physics understanding and modeling in PHM. By embedding domain knowledge into learning architectures, these approaches help constrain the hypothesis space and promote physically consistent learning, bridging the gap between theoretical modeling and real-world deployment in safety-critical applications. Part II of this review explores observational and learning biases, focusing on how data augmentation, representation, and training strategies shape model behavior and further enhance alignment between machine learning and the physical systems it aims to monitor and manage.

Suggested Citation

  • Fink, Olga & Sharma, Vinay & Nejjar, Ismail & Von Krannichfeldt, Leandro & Garmaev, Sergei & Zhang, Zepeng & Wei, Amaury & Frusque, Gaetan & Forest, Florent & Zhao, Mengjie & Hsu, Chi-Ching & Faghih N, 2026. "From physics to machine learning and back: Part I - Learning with inductive biases in prognostics and health management (PHM)," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 271(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:271:y:2026:i:c:s0951832026000293
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2026.112213
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0951832026000293
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ress.2026.112213?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:271:y:2026:i:c:s0951832026000293. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/reliability-engineering-and-system-safety .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.