IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/reensy/v131y2014icp40-52.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Variable-fidelity model selection for stochastic simulation

Author

Listed:
  • Mullins, Joshua
  • Mahadevan, Sankaran

Abstract

This paper presents a model selection methodology for maximizing the accuracy in the predicted distribution of a stochastic output of interest subject to an available computational budget. Model choices of different resolutions/fidelities such as coarse vs. fine mesh and linear vs. nonlinear material model are considered. The proposed approach makes use of efficient simulation techniques and mathematical surrogate models to develop a model selection framework. The model decision is made by considering the expected (or estimated) discrepancy between model prediction and the best available information about the quantity of interest, as well as the simulation effort required for the particular model choice. The form of the best available information may be the result of a maximum fidelity simulation, a physical experiment, or expert opinion. Several different situations corresponding to the type and amount of data are considered for a Monte Carlo simulation over the input space. The proposed methods are illustrated for a crack growth simulation problem in which model choices must be made for each cycle or cycle block even within one input sample.

Suggested Citation

  • Mullins, Joshua & Mahadevan, Sankaran, 2014. "Variable-fidelity model selection for stochastic simulation," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 40-52.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:131:y:2014:i:c:p:40-52
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2014.06.011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0951832014001331
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ress.2014.06.011?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter D. Grünwald, 2007. "The Minimum Description Length Principle," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262072815, April.
    2. Bichon, Barron J. & McFarland, John M. & Mahadevan, Sankaran, 2011. "Efficient surrogate models for reliability analysis of systems with multiple failure modes," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(10), pages 1386-1395.
    3. Marc C. Kennedy & Anthony O'Hagan, 2001. "Bayesian calibration of computer models," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 63(3), pages 425-464.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Meng, Huixing & Kloul, Leïla & Rauzy, Antoine, 2018. "Modeling patterns for reliability assessment of safety instrumented systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 111-123.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Perrin, G., 2016. "Active learning surrogate models for the conception of systems with multiple failure modes," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 130-136.
    2. Matthias Katzfuss & Joseph Guinness & Wenlong Gong & Daniel Zilber, 2020. "Vecchia Approximations of Gaussian-Process Predictions," Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics, Springer;The International Biometric Society;American Statistical Association, vol. 25(3), pages 383-414, September.
    3. Hao Wu & Michael Browne, 2015. "Random Model Discrepancy: Interpretations and Technicalities (A Rejoinder)," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 80(3), pages 619-624, September.
    4. Xiaoyu Xiong & Benjamin D. Youngman & Theodoros Economou, 2021. "Data fusion with Gaussian processes for estimation of environmental hazard events," Environmetrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(3), May.
    5. Menz, Morgane & Gogu, Christian & Dubreuil, Sylvain & Bartoli, Nathalie & Morio, Jérôme, 2020. "Adaptive coupling of reduced basis modeling and Kriging based active learning methods for reliability analyses," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    6. Petropoulos, G. & Wooster, M.J. & Carlson, T.N. & Kennedy, M.C. & Scholze, M., 2009. "A global Bayesian sensitivity analysis of the 1d SimSphere soil–vegetation–atmospheric transfer (SVAT) model using Gaussian model emulation," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(19), pages 2427-2440.
    7. Drignei, Dorin, 2011. "A general statistical model for computer experiments with time series output," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(4), pages 460-467.
    8. Neuwald Andrew F., 2014. "Protein domain hierarchy Gibbs sampling strategies," Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology, De Gruyter, vol. 13(4), pages 497-517, August.
    9. Yuan, Jun & Ng, Szu Hui, 2013. "A sequential approach for stochastic computer model calibration and prediction," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 273-286.
    10. Edward Boone & Jan Hannig & Ryad Ghanam & Sujit Ghosh & Fabrizio Ruggeri & Serge Prudhomme, 2022. "Model Validation of a Single Degree-of-Freedom Oscillator: A Case Study," Stats, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-17, November.
    11. Abokersh, Mohamed Hany & Vallès, Manel & Cabeza, Luisa F. & Boer, Dieter, 2020. "A framework for the optimal integration of solar assisted district heating in different urban sized communities: A robust machine learning approach incorporating global sensitivity analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 267(C).
    12. Gaspar, B. & Teixeira, A.P. & Guedes Soares, C., 2017. "Adaptive surrogate model with active refinement combining Kriging and a trust region method," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 277-291.
    13. Campbell, Katherine, 2006. "Statistical calibration of computer simulations," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 91(10), pages 1358-1363.
    14. Antony M. Overstall & David C. Woods, 2016. "Multivariate emulation of computer simulators: model selection and diagnostics with application to a humanitarian relief model," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 65(4), pages 483-505, August.
    15. Na, Wei & Wang, Mingming, 2022. "A Bayesian approach with urban-scale energy model to calibrate building energy consumption for space heating: A case study of application in Beijing," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 247(C).
    16. Das Ujjwal & Ebrahimi Nader, 2018. "A New Method For Covariate Selection In Cox Model," Statistics in Transition New Series, Statistics Poland, vol. 19(2), pages 297-314, June.
    17. Andrew White & Malachi Tolman & Howard D Thames & Hubert Rodney Withers & Kathy A Mason & Mark K Transtrum, 2016. "The Limitations of Model-Based Experimental Design and Parameter Estimation in Sloppy Systems," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-26, December.
    18. MacKenzie, Cameron A. & Hu, Chao, 2019. "Decision making under uncertainty for design of resilient engineered systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    19. Huang, Xucong & Peng, Zhaoqin & Tang, Diyin & Chen, Juan & Zio, Enrico & Zheng, Zaiping, 2024. "A physics-informed autoencoder for system health state assessment based on energy-oriented system performance," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 242(C).
    20. Pasanisi, Alberto & Keller, Merlin & Parent, Eric, 2012. "Estimation of a quantity of interest in uncertainty analysis: Some help from Bayesian decision theory," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 93-101.

    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:131:y:2014:i:c:p:40-52. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.