Inverse Uncertainty Quantification using deterministic sampling : An intercomparison between different IUQ methods

In this thesis, two novel methods for Inverse Uncertainty Quantification are benchmarked against the more established methods of Monte Carlo sampling of output parameters(MC) and Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE). Inverse Uncertainty Quantification (IUQ) is the process of how to best estimate the...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Andersson, Hjalmar
Format: Others
Language:English
Published: Uppsala universitet, Tillämpad kärnfysik 2021
Subjects:
Online Access:http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-447070
id ndltd-UPSALLA1-oai-DiVA.org-uu-447070
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-UPSALLA1-oai-DiVA.org-uu-4470702021-06-25T05:37:14ZInverse Uncertainty Quantification using deterministic sampling : An intercomparison between different IUQ methodsengAndersson, HjalmarUppsala universitet, Tillämpad kärnfysik2021Inverse Uncertainty QuantificationModel calibrationUnscented transformDeterministic samplingEngineering and TechnologyTeknik och teknologierProbability Theory and StatisticsSannolikhetsteori och statistikIn this thesis, two novel methods for Inverse Uncertainty Quantification are benchmarked against the more established methods of Monte Carlo sampling of output parameters(MC) and Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE). Inverse Uncertainty Quantification (IUQ) is the process of how to best estimate the values of the input parameters in a simulation, and the uncertainty of said estimation, given a measurement of the output parameters. The two new methods are Deterministic Sampling (DS) and Weight Fixing (WF). Deterministic sampling uses a set of sampled points such that the set of points has the same statistic as the output. For each point, the corresponding point of the input is found to be able to calculate the statistics of the input. Weight fixing uses random samples from the rough region around the input to create a linear problem that involves finding the right weights so that the output has the right statistic. The benchmarking between the four methods shows that both DS and WF are comparably accurate to both MC and MLE in most cases tested in this thesis. It was also found that both DS and WF uses approximately the same amount of function calls as MLE and all three methods use a lot fewer function calls to the simulation than MC. It was discovered that WF is not always able to find a solution. This is probably because the methods used for WF are not the optimal method for what they are supposed to do. Finding more optimal methods for WF is something that could be investigated further. Student thesisinfo:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesistexthttp://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-447070UPTEC F, 1401-5757 ; 21044application/pdfinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
collection NDLTD
language English
format Others
sources NDLTD
topic Inverse Uncertainty Quantification
Model calibration
Unscented transform
Deterministic sampling
Engineering and Technology
Teknik och teknologier
Probability Theory and Statistics
Sannolikhetsteori och statistik
spellingShingle Inverse Uncertainty Quantification
Model calibration
Unscented transform
Deterministic sampling
Engineering and Technology
Teknik och teknologier
Probability Theory and Statistics
Sannolikhetsteori och statistik
Andersson, Hjalmar
Inverse Uncertainty Quantification using deterministic sampling : An intercomparison between different IUQ methods
description In this thesis, two novel methods for Inverse Uncertainty Quantification are benchmarked against the more established methods of Monte Carlo sampling of output parameters(MC) and Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE). Inverse Uncertainty Quantification (IUQ) is the process of how to best estimate the values of the input parameters in a simulation, and the uncertainty of said estimation, given a measurement of the output parameters. The two new methods are Deterministic Sampling (DS) and Weight Fixing (WF). Deterministic sampling uses a set of sampled points such that the set of points has the same statistic as the output. For each point, the corresponding point of the input is found to be able to calculate the statistics of the input. Weight fixing uses random samples from the rough region around the input to create a linear problem that involves finding the right weights so that the output has the right statistic. The benchmarking between the four methods shows that both DS and WF are comparably accurate to both MC and MLE in most cases tested in this thesis. It was also found that both DS and WF uses approximately the same amount of function calls as MLE and all three methods use a lot fewer function calls to the simulation than MC. It was discovered that WF is not always able to find a solution. This is probably because the methods used for WF are not the optimal method for what they are supposed to do. Finding more optimal methods for WF is something that could be investigated further.
author Andersson, Hjalmar
author_facet Andersson, Hjalmar
author_sort Andersson, Hjalmar
title Inverse Uncertainty Quantification using deterministic sampling : An intercomparison between different IUQ methods
title_short Inverse Uncertainty Quantification using deterministic sampling : An intercomparison between different IUQ methods
title_full Inverse Uncertainty Quantification using deterministic sampling : An intercomparison between different IUQ methods
title_fullStr Inverse Uncertainty Quantification using deterministic sampling : An intercomparison between different IUQ methods
title_full_unstemmed Inverse Uncertainty Quantification using deterministic sampling : An intercomparison between different IUQ methods
title_sort inverse uncertainty quantification using deterministic sampling : an intercomparison between different iuq methods
publisher Uppsala universitet, Tillämpad kärnfysik
publishDate 2021
url http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-447070
work_keys_str_mv AT anderssonhjalmar inverseuncertaintyquantificationusingdeterministicsamplinganintercomparisonbetweendifferentiuqmethods
_version_ 1719412790153707520