IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/reensy/v189y2019icp357-377.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrated framework for model assessment and advanced uncertainty quantification of nuclear computer codes under Bayesian statistics

Author

Listed:
  • Radaideh, Majdi I.
  • Borowiec, Katarzyna
  • Kozlowski, Tomasz

Abstract

A framework for model evaluation and uncertainty quantification (UQ) is presented with applications oriented to nuclear engineering simulation codes. Our framework is inspired by the previous research on Bayesian statistics and model averaging. The methodology is demonstrated by performing UQ of three thermal-hydraulic computer codes used for two-phase flow simulation inside nuclear reactors, and conclusions regarding their performance are drawn. The complexity of the framework implementation depends upon the information to be drawn about the models as well as the nature of the models and the data. Uncertainties inherent in the input parameters and experimental data, along with predictive and model-form uncertainty can be quantified in this methodology. A composite (average) model based on the competent models can be created for improved response prediction. Two benchmarks featuring steady-state void fraction data in full-scale light water reactor (LWR) channels are used to demonstrate the methodology. The results show that the three models/codes demonstrate variable competitiveness in reproducing the data (i.e. goodness of fit with the data). There is no consistent trend at which each code excels. The predictive uncertainty (representing individual model deficiency or discrepancy) dominates the model-form uncertainty for many cases in this study due to two reasons: (1) presence of a single competent model for a specific response and (2) poor agreement with experimental data for certain responses at which nuclear codes struggle, such as low pressure and subcooled boiling conditions. In general, improvements in composite predictions (based on posterior model weights) are observed for BFBT data, while slight improvement is found for PSBT. For PSBT, the predictive uncertainty of RELAP5 and TRACE dominates the response uncertainty causing weak improvement. Additional efforts are needed to improve the closure models of these codes in future to reduce the model discrepancy contribution. This framework can be utilized for this purpose at which various closure models for the same code can be assessed in terms of their effect on the final response uncertainty. The proposed framework is flexible and extendable to other types of physics, models, and data. Developing the underlying methodology of calculating the model weights is the main focus in the subsequent studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Radaideh, Majdi I. & Borowiec, Katarzyna & Kozlowski, Tomasz, 2019. "Integrated framework for model assessment and advanced uncertainty quantification of nuclear computer codes under Bayesian statistics," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 357-377.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:189:y:2019:i:c:p:357-377
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2019.04.020
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0951832018313772
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ress.2019.04.020?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. Tiago M. Fragoso & Wesley Bertoli & Francisco Louzada, 2018. "Bayesian Model Averaging: A Systematic Review and Conceptual Classification," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 86(1), pages 1-28, April.
    2. Enrique López Droguett & Ali Mosleh, 2008. "Bayesian Methodology for Model Uncertainty Using Model Performance Data," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(5), pages 1457-1476, October.
    3. Park, Inseok & Grandhi, Ramana V., 2014. "A Bayesian statistical method for quantifying model form uncertainty and two model combination methods," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 46-56.
    4. D. Neykov & F. Aydogan & L. Hochreiter & H. Utsuno & F. Kasahara & E. Sartori & M. Martin, 2006. "NUPEC BWR Full-size Fine-mesh Bundle Test (BFBT) Benchmark: Volume I: Specifications," OECD Papers, OECD Publishing, vol. 6(7), pages 1-132.
    5. Park, Inseok & Amarchinta, Hemanth K. & Grandhi, Ramana V., 2010. "A Bayesian approach for quantification of model uncertainty," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(7), pages 777-785.
    6. Wu, Xu & Kozlowski, Tomasz & Meidani, Hadi, 2018. "Kriging-based inverse uncertainty quantification of nuclear fuel performance code BISON fission gas release model using time series measurement data," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 422-436.
    7. 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. Liu, Yang & Wang, Dewei & Sun, Xiaodong & Liu, Yang & Dinh, Nam & Hu, Rui, 2021. "Uncertainty quantification for Multiphase-CFD simulations of bubbly flows: a machine learning-based Bayesian approach supported by high-resolution experiments," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    2. Guo, Zehua & Dailey, Ryan & Feng, Tangtao & Zhou, Yukun & Sun, Zhongning & Corradini, Michael L & Wang, Jun, 2021. "Uncertainty analysis of ATF Cr-coated-Zircaloy on BWR in-vessel accident progression during a station blackout," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    3. Radaideh, Majdi I. & Kozlowski, Tomasz, 2020. "Surrogate modeling of advanced computer simulations using deep Gaussian processes," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    4. Abdallah, Imad & Tatsis, Konstantinos & Chatzi, Eleni, 2020. "Unsupervised local cluster-weighted bootstrap aggregating the output from multiple stochastic simulators," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).

    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. Liu, Di & Wang, Shaoping & Zhang, Chao & Tomovic, Mileta, 2018. "Bayesian model averaging based reliability analysis method for monotonic degradation dataset based on inverse Gaussian process and Gamma process," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 25-38.
    2. Radaideh, Majdi I. & Kozlowski, Tomasz, 2020. "Surrogate modeling of advanced computer simulations using deep Gaussian processes," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    3. Liu, Yang & Wang, Dewei & Sun, Xiaodong & Liu, Yang & Dinh, Nam & Hu, Rui, 2021. "Uncertainty quantification for Multiphase-CFD simulations of bubbly flows: a machine learning-based Bayesian approach supported by high-resolution experiments," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    4. Maupin, Kathryn A. & Swiler, Laura P., 2020. "Model discrepancy calibration across experimental settings," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    5. Sankararaman, Shankar & Mahadevan, Sankaran, 2015. "Integration of model verification, validation, and calibration for uncertainty quantification in engineering systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 194-209.
    6. Riley, Matthew E., 2015. "Evidence-based quantification of uncertainties induced via simulation-based modeling," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 79-86.
    7. Francesco Di Maio & Nicola Pedroni & Barnabás Tóth & Luciano Burgazzi & Enrico Zio, 2021. "Reliability Assessment of Passive Safety Systems for Nuclear Energy Applications: State-of-the-Art and Open Issues," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-17, August.
    8. Park, Inseok & Grandhi, Ramana V., 2014. "A Bayesian statistical method for quantifying model form uncertainty and two model combination methods," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 46-56.
    9. 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.
    10. Roland Brown & Yingling Fan & Kirti Das & Julian Wolfson, 2021. "Iterated multisource exchangeability models for individualized inference with an application to mobile sensor data," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 77(2), pages 401-412, June.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Emanuel Kopp, 2018. "Determinants of U.S. Business Investment," IMF Working Papers 2018/139, International Monetary Fund.
    15. 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.
    16. Guo, Zehua & Dailey, Ryan & Feng, Tangtao & Zhou, Yukun & Sun, Zhongning & Corradini, Michael L & Wang, Jun, 2021. "Uncertainty analysis of ATF Cr-coated-Zircaloy on BWR in-vessel accident progression during a station blackout," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    17. 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.
    18. Liao, Jun & Zou, Guohua, 2020. "Corrected Mallows criterion for model averaging," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    19. Mark F. J. Steel, 2020. "Model Averaging and Its Use in Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 58(3), pages 644-719, September.
    20. 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.

    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:189:y:2019:i:c:p:357-377. 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.