imizer         ADAM [@kingma2014adam]
  Weight Decay      $0.01$
  Learning Rate     $5$e$-6$, with learning rate decay on plateau
  Epochs            $100$
  Training Data     $10000$
  Mini-batch size   $20$
  SVGD Particles    $20$
  ----------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  : Neural network architecture and training details.[]{data-label="tab:nn"}

The network architecture was determined by training an ensemble of neural networks with different number of hidden layers. Other network parameters, such as the taper of the last several layers and learning rate specified in Table \[tab:nn\], were identical between each of the tested architectures. The networks are compared in Fig. \[fig:hiddenLayersMSE\] with the mean negative log likelihood (MNLL) defined by: $$\begin{gathered}
    \quad {MNLL}=-\frac{1}{T}\sum_{i=1}^{T}\frac{1}{N}\sum_{j=1}^{N}\log{p(\hat{\bm{b}}_{i}|\bm{f}(\hat{\bm{x}}_{i}, \mathbf{w}_{j}), \beta_{j})},\end{gathered}$$ where $T$, $\hat{\bm{x}}$, $\hat{\bm{b}}$ are the number of validation/test data points, the target inputs and target outputs, respectively. We observe little distinguishable difference indicating that training between each architecture is relatively the same. Additionally, the mean squared prediction error of the unnormalized anisotropic tensor $\bm{a}^{*}$ is plotted for a validation set of $1000$ random data points from each of the training flows (i.e. $5000$ total data points). The mean squared prediction error (MSPE) is defined as: $${MSPE}=\frac{1}{T}\sum^{T}_{i=1}{\left\lVert\mathbb{E}(\bm{a}^{*}_{i}|\hat{\bm{x}}_{i},\mathcal{D})-\hat{\bm{a}}_{i}\right\rVert}^{2}_{2}\approx\frac{1}{T}\sum^{T}_{i=1}{\left\lVert\frac{k}{N}\sum_{j=1}^{N}\bm{f}(\hat{\bm{x}}_{i},\mathbf{w}_{j})-\hat{\bm{a}}_{i}\right\
imizer          ADAM   [ @kingma2014adam ] 
   Weight Decay       $ 0.01 $ 
   Learning Rate      $ 5$e$-6 $, with learning rate decay on plateau 
   Epochs             $ 100 $ 
   Training Data      $ 10000 $ 
   Mini - batch size    $ 20 $ 
   SVGD Particles     $ 20 $ 
   ----------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

  : nervous net computer architecture and training details.[]{data - label="tab: nn " } 

 The network architecture was determine by training an ensemble of nervous networks with different number of concealed level. Other net parameters, such as the taper of the last several layer and learning pace specified in Table   \[tab: nn\ ], were identical between each of the test architecture. The networks are compared in Fig.   \[fig: hiddenLayersMSE\ ] with the mean minus log likelihood (MNLL) defined by: $ $ \begin{gathered } 
     \quad { MNLL}=-\frac{1}{T}\sum_{i=1}^{T}\frac{1}{N}\sum_{j=1}^{N}\log{p(\hat{\bm{b}}_{i}|\bm{f}(\hat{\bm{x}}_{i }, \mathbf{w}_{j }), \beta_{j})},\end{gathered}$$ where $ T$, $ \hat{\bm{x}}$, $ \hat{\bm{b}}$ are the number of validation / trial data points, the target inputs and target outputs, respectively. We note little distinguishable difference indicating that training between each computer architecture is relatively the like. Additionally, the beggarly squared prediction error of the unnormalized anisotropic tensor $ \bm{a}^{*}$ is plotted for a validation set of $ 1000 $ random data points from each of the education flows (i.e. $ 5000 $ entire data points). The mean square prediction error (MSPE) is defined as: $ $ { MSPE}=\frac{1}{T}\sum^{T}_{i=1}{\left\lVert\mathbb{E}(\bm{a}^{*}_{i}|\hat{\bm{x}}_{i},\mathcal{D})-\hat{\bm{a}}_{i}\right\rVert}^{2}_{2}\approx\frac{1}{T}\sum^{T}_{i=1}{\left\lVert\frac{k}{N}\sum_{j=1}^{N}\bm{f}(\hat{\bm{x}}_{i},\mathbf{w}_{j})-\hat{\bm{a}}_{i}\right\
imixer         ADAM [@kingma2014adxm]
  Weight Decai      $0.01$
  Learnjng Rate     $5$e$-6$, with learning rate deray in plqteau
  Epochs            $100$
  Traijing Datq     $10000$
  Mini-batrg size   $20$
  SVFF Paxtmcles    $20$
  ----------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  : Keural netwmrk architectuse aud training details.[]{data-label="tab:nn"}

The networl wrchitecture wws dttewminsd by training an ensemble of neurzl netwmrks with difgerent number of hidden lajers. Other network parwmeters, sucy as rhe taper of the last several layets and learning rate specified iv Tabke \[tab:nn\], wetz idfttical betwxen eabh of the tesbvd archhtecturrs. The networkx ace cimpared in Fig. \[fig:hiddxnLayersMSE\] with the mean negdtnve log likelihood (MNOL) defited ty: $$\bdtin{eatgeced}
    \quwd {JNLL}=-\frac{1}{T}\shm_{i=1}^{T}\frac{1}{N}\sun_{j=1}^{N}\log{p(\hat{\bm{b}}_{i}|\bm{f}(\hau{\bm{v}}_{p}, \mathbf{w}_{j}), \befa_{j})},\end{daehered}$$ where $T$, $\hat{\bm{x}}$, $\hat{\bm{b}}$ are the nukbed of validation/test datq points, the target ijputs and target outputs, respectively. We observe little divtingnirhayoe diwdegence indicating that training between each awdhotvcture is relativcly the same. Additoojakjy, the mean sduared prsdiction error of hhe unnjrmaluzed anisjtrolic tensor $\bm{a}^{*}$ is plotted fir a validatpon wet of $1000$ random datc points froo eavh of the training flows (i.e. $5000$ totzl data poijts). The msxn squared prediztipn error (MSPE) is defined as: $${ISPE}=\frac{1}{T}\wum^{T}_{n=1}{\left\lVeft\majhbb{E}(\bm{w}^{*}_{i}|\hat{\bm{x}}_{i},\mwthcal{D})-\hat{\bm{a}}_{i}\right\rVert}^{2}_{2}\wppror\frac{1}{D}\sum^{T}_{i=1}{\left\pVert\frac{k}{N}\sum_{j=1}^{N}\bm{f}(\hat{\bm{x}}_{i},\mathbh{x}_{j})-\hat{\bm{a}}_{i}\righj\
imizer ADAM [@kingma2014adam] Weight Decay $0.01$ Learning with rate decay plateau Epochs $100$ $20$ Particles $20$ ----------------- : Neural network and training details.[]{data-label="tab:nn"} The network architecture determined by training an ensemble of neural networks with different number of hidden Other network parameters, such as the taper of the last several layers and rate in \[tab:nn\], identical between each of the tested architectures. The networks are compared in Fig. \[fig:hiddenLayersMSE\] with the negative log likelihood (MNLL) defined by: $$\begin{gathered} \quad \mathbf{w}_{j}), \beta_{j})},\end{gathered}$$ where $T$, $\hat{\bm{b}}$ are the number of data the target and outputs, We observe little difference indicating that training between each architecture is relatively the same. Additionally, the mean squared prediction error the unnormalized $\bm{a}^{*}$ is for validation of $1000$ random from each of the training flows data points). The mean squared prediction error (MSPE) defined as:
imizer         ADAM [@kingma2014adam]
  WeighT Decay      $0.01$
  LearNing RAte     $5$E$-6$, wiTh LearNing Rate decay on plaTEau
  EPochs            $100$
  Training Data     $10000$
  Mini-bAtch sIzE   $20$
  sVGD pArTicleS    $20$
  ----------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  : Neural NEtWORk aRcHiTecTuRE aNd traIniNg detaiLs.[]{data-labeL="taB:nN"}

The network aRChItecture waS deTermined by trAinIng an eNsEmbLE of neUraL netwOrks wiTH diffeRent numbeR oF Hidden LAyers. OtHER nEtwoRk parameters, such aS ThE Taper of the last SeveraL lAYeRS And LeaRning rate sPeCifieD In Table \[TAb:NN\], WEre IDentical betweEn each of the TEstEd archItEctURes. The NetwoRkS Are Compared in FIg. \[fiG:hiddenLaYersMSe\] With the MEan negaTive loG liKelIhooD (mNlL) DefInED by: $$\BEgIn{gATheRed}
    \quad {MnLl}=-\fRac{1}{T}\sUm_{i=1}^{T}\FRAC{1}{n}\sum_{J=1}^{N}\lOg{p(\hAt{\bm{b}}_{I}|\bm{f}(\hat{\bm{x}}_{i}, \maThbF{w}_{j}), \bETa_{j})},\End{gaThereD}$$ wheRe $t$, $\hat{\bM{x}}$, $\hat{\bM{b}}$ are ThE number of validaTion/Test data pOinTs, The TaRget iNPuts anD taRgeT outputS, respecTIveLy. wE OBsErve little distinguIsHABlE differeNce indICaTiNG that traInIng BetwEEN each ArchITeCture is rElativELy ThE same. AdDiTionalLy, The MeaN squaREd prEdictiOn error oF the uNNormalized anisOTropic tensor $\bM{A}^{*}$ iS PLoTTed fOr a Validation sEt of $1000$ RAndoM datA PoIntS From eAch of ThE TrAIning flows (i.e. $5000$ total daTa Points). the meAn squared predIction erroR (mspE) is defiNed aS: $${mSpe}=\frac{1}{T}\sum^{T}_{i=1}{\lefT\lVerT\mathbb{E}(\bm{A}^{*}_{I}|\hat{\bm{x}}_{i},\MathcAl{D})-\hat{\bm{A}}_{i}\right\rVERT}^{2}_{2}\approx\fRac{1}{t}\suM^{T}_{i=1}{\LefT\LveRt\frac{k}{N}\sum_{j=1}^{N}\BM{F}(\hat{\Bm{X}}_{i},\mathbF{w}_{j})-\Hat{\bm{a}}_{i}\RigHt\
imizer         ADAM [@king ma2014adam ]
  W eig htDe cay    $0.01$
  Lear n ingRate     $5$e$-6$, wit h lea rn i ng r a te  deca y on pl a te a u 
 Ep oc hs       $1 00$
  T raining Da ta   $10000$
 M in i-batch si ze  $20$
  SVG D P articl es   $20$  - ----- ------ - ---- - --------- -- - ------ - ------- - - -- ---- ----------------- - -- - -------------- ------ -- - -- - - --- 

 : Neuralne twork archite c tu r e and training deta ils.[]{data - lab el="ta b: nn" } 

Thenetwo rk arc hitecture w as d etermined  by tr a ining a n  ensemb le ofneu ral  net w or ks  wi th dif f er ent num ber of h id de n lay ers. O t h er n etw orkparam eters, such a s t he t a per  of t he la st s ev erallayers  andle arning rate spe cifi ed in Tab le\[ tab :n n\],w ere id ent ica l betwe en each ofth e t es ted architectures.  T h e  n etworksare co m pa re d  in Fig.  \ [fi g:hi d d enLay ersM S E\ ] with t he mea n  n eg ative l og  likel ih ood  (M NLL)d efin ed by:  $$\begi n{gat h ered}
    \qua d  {MNLL}=-\fra c {1 } { T} \ sum_ {i= 1}^{T}\frac {1}{ N }\su m_{j = 1} ^{N } \log{ p(\ha t{ \ bm { b}}_{i}|\bm{f}(\hat {\ bm{x}} _{i},  \mathbf{w}_{ j}), \beta _ { j })},\end {gat h er e d}$$ where $T$ , $\h at{\bm{x}} $ , $\hat{ \bm{b }}$ arethe numbe r of valid ati on/ tes t d a t apoints, the t a r getin puts an d t arget o utp uts , r esp ec tively. W e observ eli tt le  di sting u ishabledi ffe re nce  indi c atingthattrai ni ng bet ween ea c ha r chit ec tu re i s r el ative ly t h e s ame. Ad ditionall y,t he m ea nsquared  prediction e rr or of theun nor malize d anisotro pic tensor $\bm{a}^{*}$ is plot ted  fora va lidationset  of $1 000 $  rando m data  poin ts  fr o m  each o fthe  t raining fl o w s ( i.e.$5 000$  totaldata points). Them ean  squared pred ict ione r ro r ( M SP E ) i sd efi n e d as: $${MSPE}= \frac{1}{T }\ s um ^{T}_{i=1} { \le ft \lVert\ mathbb{ E}(\b m {a}^{*} _{i}|\hat {\bm{x}}_ {i },\m a t hca l{D})-\hat {\bm{a}} _{i}\righ t \rVer t }^ {2}_{ 2}\ approx \f rac {1}{T }\sum^ { T}_ {i=1} {\left \l Vert\f rac{k }{ N}\sum_{ j=1}^{N}\bm{f}(\hat{\bm {x}}_{ i},\m ath bf{w}_{j} )-\ h at{ \bm{a}}_{ i}\r ight\
imizer _ _   _ ADAM [@kingma2014adam]
__Weight Decay__  _ $0.01$
 _Learning Rate  _  $5$e$-6$,_with_learning rate decay on plateau
  Epochs       __ __$100$
_ Training Data  _  $10000$
  Mini-batch_size _ $20$
  SVGD Particles   _$20$
_ ----------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_ : Neural network architecture and training details.[]{data-label="tab:nn"}

The network_architecture was determined by training an_ensemble of neural_networks_with_different number of hidden_layers. Other network parameters, such as_the taper of the last several_layers and learning rate specified in Table \[tab:nn\],_were identical between each of the_tested architectures. The networks are_compared in_Fig. \[fig:hiddenLayersMSE\] with the mean negative_log likelihood (MNLL)_defined by:_$$\begin{gathered}
  _ \quad {MNLL}=-\frac{1}{T}\sum_{i=1}^{T}\frac{1}{N}\sum_{j=1}^{N}\log{p(\hat{\bm{b}}_{i}|\bm{f}(\hat{\bm{x}}_{i}, \mathbf{w}_{j}), \beta_{j})},\end{gathered}$$ where_$T$, $\hat{\bm{x}}$, $\hat{\bm{b}}$_are the number of validation/test data_points,_the target inputs_and_target_outputs, respectively._We observe little_distinguishable_difference indicating_that_training between each architecture is relatively_the_same. Additionally, the mean squared prediction error_of the unnormalized anisotropic_tensor_$\bm{a}^{*}$ is plotted for_a validation set of $1000$_random data points from each of_the training_flows (i.e._$5000$ total data points). The mean squared prediction error (MSPE) is_defined as: $${MSPE}=\frac{1}{T}\sum^{T}_{i=1}{\left\lVert\mathbb{E}(\bm{a}^{*}_{i}|\hat{\bm{x}}_{i},\mathcal{D})-\hat{\bm{a}}_{i}\right\rVert}^{2}_{2}\approx\frac{1}{T}\sum^{T}_{i=1}{\left\lVert\frac{k}{N}\sum_{j=1}^{N}\bm{f}(\hat{\bm{x}}_{i},\mathbf{w}_{j})-\hat{\bm{a}}_{i}\right\