Skip to content
Technology How it works Breeder — Hyperion Burner — Aegis Burner — MetroVolt AI-Native Architecture Magnets Fuel cycle Safety Roadmap
Solutions AI & Data Centers Defense & Government Grid & Baseload Neutron Detection Quantum
Learn Technical Library
Proof Publications Whitepapers Technical Library Open Science & Reproducibility The Honest Gates
Company About / Mission Leadership Environment Health & Safety Investors Careers Press Contact
3D Model
AI Architecture › L3 · Twin Modeling & AI
L3 · Twin Modeling & AI

Hybrid GNN-PINN Models

Kronos combines the graph network's diagnostic reasoning with the physics network's equation-solving so measurement and physics constrain one solution.

THE STACK · click to jumpL7Ecosystem & StrategyL6Experience & VisualizationL5Applications & CopilotsL4OrchestrationL3Twin Modeling & AIL2Data FabricL1Control PlaneL0Foundation▲tlmctl▼L3 · TWIN MODELING & AIThe KRONOS-CTRL digital twin and its predictive shadow.1KRONOS-CTRL Twinlive plant state2GNNscoupled subsystems3PINNsphysics-constrained4Anomaly Ensemblesdrift & fault detection5MPCreceding-horizon control6Predictive Shadowruns seconds aheadMACHINE TIEState estimate descends to L1 control; alerts rise to L4 / L5.KRONOS FUSION ENERGYAI-NATIVE S.M.A.R.T. GENERATORTWIN MODELING & AISHEET 05REV. 2026-08L3 · AI-NATIVE STACK
L3 · Twin Modeling & AI — its place in the stack (left, click any layer) and its internal components (right). Telemetry rises; control descends.

Two strengths, one estimate

The GNN excels at reasoning over the diagnostic constellation, denoising, imputing dropped channels, identifying mode structure, but it does not enforce the governing equations. The PINN excels at solving the physics but needs a clean, complete measurement constraint. Kronos couples them: the GNN produces a physics-consistent measurement set, and the PINN produces the equation-consistent field that best matches it.

How the coupling works

In equilibrium reconstruction, the GNN conditions and imputes the flux-loop, Mirnov, and kinetic diagnostics (with uncertainty), and the Grad-Shafranov PINN reconstructs psi(R,Z) whose data term uses exactly those GNN outputs, weighted by their imputation uncertainty. The physics residual regularizes the reconstruction so it cannot fit noise, and the GNN keeps the data constraint intact through dropouts. Neither alone is as robust as the pair.

The same hybrid serves the burner: the GNN reasons over the end-cell and central-cell diagnostics, and the ambipolar-potential PINN solves phi(z) constrained by them. And it serves anomaly detection: the GNN localizes an off-pattern signal while the PINN residual says whether the resulting state is physically consistent, together distinguishing a sensor fault from a genuine physical event.

This composition is why Kronos does not choose between data-driven and physics-driven modeling: the diagnostic reasoning and the equation-solving are complementary, and binding them gives the twin both robustness to imperfect data and fidelity to first principles.

Content reviewed August 2026 · design-and-simulation stage