IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/aistmt/v73y2021i2d10.1007_s10463-020-00748-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimation of an improved surrogate model in uncertainty quantification by neural networks

Author

Listed:
  • Benedict Götz

    (Technische Universität Darmstadt)

  • Sebastian Kersting

    (Technische Universität Darmstadt)

  • Michael Kohler

    (Technische Universität Darmstadt)

Abstract

Quantification of uncertainty of a technical system is often based on a surrogate model of a corresponding simulation model. In any application, the simulation model will not describe the reality perfectly, and consequently the surrogate model will be imperfect. In this article, we combine observed data from the technical system with simulated data from the imperfect simulation model in order to estimate an improved surrogate model consisting of multilayer feedforward neural networks, and we show that under suitable assumptions, this estimate is able to circumvent the curse of dimensionality. Based on this improved surrogate model, we show a rate of the convergence result for density estimates. The finite sample size performance of the estimates is illustrated by applying them to simulated data. The practical usefulness of the newly proposed estimates is demonstrated by using them to predict the uncertainty of a lateral vibration attenuation system with piezo-elastic supports.

Suggested Citation

  • Benedict Götz & Sebastian Kersting & Michael Kohler, 2021. "Estimation of an improved surrogate model in uncertainty quantification by neural networks," Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Springer;The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, vol. 73(2), pages 249-281, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:aistmt:v:73:y:2021:i:2:d:10.1007_s10463-020-00748-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s10463-020-00748-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10463-020-00748-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10463-020-00748-1?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. Raymond K. W. Wong & Curtis B. Storlie & Thomas C. M. Lee, 2017. "A frequentist approach to computer model calibration," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 79(2), pages 635-648, March.
    2. Michael Kohler & Adam Krzyżak & Shashidhar Mallapur & Roland Platz, 2018. "Uncertainty Quantification in Case of Imperfect Models: A Non‐Bayesian Approach," Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, Danish Society for Theoretical Statistics;Finnish Statistical Society;Norwegian Statistical Association;Swedish Statistical Association, vol. 45(3), pages 729-752, September.
    3. Ann-Kathrin Bott & Tina Felber & Michael Kohler, 2015. "Estimation of a density in a simulation model," Journal of Nonparametric Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(3), pages 271-285, September.
    4. 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.
    5. Tina Felber & Michael Kohler & Adam Krzyżak, 2015. "Adaptive density estimation based on real and artificial data," Journal of Nonparametric Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(1), pages 1-18, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Michael Kohler & Adam Krzyżak, 2020. "Estimating quantiles in imperfect simulation models using conditional density estimation," Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Springer;The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, vol. 72(1), pages 123-155, February.
    2. Sun, Yang & Fang, Xiangzhong, 2024. "Efficient calibration of computer models with multivariate output," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    3. SungKu Kang & Ran Jin & Xinwei Deng & Ron S. Kenett, 2023. "Challenges of modeling and analysis in cybermanufacturing: a review from a machine learning and computation perspective," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 415-428, February.
    4. Huaimin Diao & Yan Wang & Dianpeng Wang, 2022. "A D-Optimal Sequential Calibration Design for Computer Models," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-15, April.
    5. Jung, Yongsu & Jo, Hwisang & Choo, Jeonghwan & Lee, Ikjin, 2022. "Statistical model calibration and design optimization under aleatory and epistemic uncertainty," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    6. Wang, Bo & Zhang, Qiong & Xie, Wei, 2019. "Bayesian sequential data collection for stochastic simulation calibration," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 277(1), pages 300-316.
    7. Vanslette, Kevin & Tohme, Tony & Youcef-Toumi, Kamal, 2020. "A general model validation and testing tool," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    8. 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.
    9. Jakub Bijak & Jason D. Hilton & Eric Silverman & Viet Dung Cao, 2013. "Reforging the Wedding Ring," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 29(27), pages 729-766.
    10. 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.
    11. Villez, Kris & Del Giudice, Dario & Neumann, Marc B. & Rieckermann, Jörg, 2020. "Accounting for erroneous model structures in biokinetic process models," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    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. David Breitenmoser & Francesco Cerutti & Gernot Butterweck & Malgorzata Magdalena Kasprzak & Sabine Mayer, 2023. "Emulator-based Bayesian inference on non-proportional scintillation models by compton-edge probing," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-12, December.
    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. Yuan, Jun & Nian, Victor & Su, Bin & Meng, Qun, 2017. "A simultaneous calibration and parameter ranking method for building energy models," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 206(C), pages 657-666.
    17. Barde, Sylvain, 2024. "Bayesian estimation of large-scale simulation models with Gaussian process regression surrogates," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    18. Gross, Eitan, 2015. "Effect of environmental stress on regulation of gene expression in the yeast," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 430(C), pages 224-235.
    19. Hwang, Youngdeok & Kim, Hang J. & Chang, Won & Yeo, Kyongmin & Kim, Yongku, 2019. "Bayesian pollution source identification via an inverse physics model," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 76-92.
    20. Choi, Wonjun & Menberg, Kathrin & Kikumoto, Hideki & Heo, Yeonsook & Choudhary, Ruchi & Ooka, Ryozo, 2018. "Bayesian inference of structural error in inverse models of thermal response tests," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 1473-1485.

    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:spr:aistmt:v:73:y:2021:i:2:d:10.1007_s10463-020-00748-1. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.