Arrhenius.jl: A Differentiable Combustion SimulationPackage

Combustion kinetic modeling is an integral part of combustion simulation, and extensive studies have been devoted to developing both high fidelity and computationally affordable models. Despite these efforts, modeling combustion kinetics is still challenging due to the demand for expert knowledge and optimization against experiments, as well as the lack of understanding of the associated uncertainties. Therefore, data-driven approaches that enable efficient discovery and calibration of kinetic models have received much attention in recent years, the core of which is the optimization based on big data. Differentiable programming is a promising approach for learning kinetic models from data by efficiently computing the gradient of objective functions to model parameters. However, it is often challenging to implement differentiable programming in practice. Therefore, it is still not available in widely ∗Corresponding author Email addresses: weiqiji@mit.edu (Weiqi Ji ), silideng@mit.edu (Sili Deng ) Preprint submitted to Elsevier July 14, 2021 ar X iv :2 10 7. 06 17 2v 1 [ ph ys ic s. ch em -p h] 1 9 Ju n 20 21 utilized combustion simulation packages such as CHEMKIN and Cantera. Here, we present a differentiable combustion simulation package leveraging the eco-system in Julia, including DifferentialEquations.jl for solving differential equations, ForwardDiff.jl for auto-differentiation, and Flux.jl for incorporating neural network models into combustion simulations and optimizing neural network models using the state-of-the-art deep learning optimizers. We demonstrate the benefits of differentiable programming in efficient and accurate gradient computations, with applications in uncertainty quantification, kinetic model reduction, data assimilation, and model discovery.

[1]  George Em Karniadakis,et al.  Hidden fluid mechanics: Learning velocity and pressure fields from flow visualizations , 2020, Science.

[2]  David A. Sheen,et al.  The method of uncertainty quantification and minimization using polynomial chaos expansions , 2011 .

[3]  Miles Lubin,et al.  Forward-Mode Automatic Differentiation in Julia , 2016, ArXiv.

[4]  Zhuyin Ren,et al.  Quantification of modeling uncertainties in turbulent flames through successive dimension reduction , 2020 .

[5]  Stephen Dooley,et al.  Toward Machine Learned Highly Reduced Kinetic Models for Methane/Air Combustion , 2021, Volume 3A: Combustion, Fuels, and Emissions.

[6]  F. Egolfopoulos,et al.  Direct sensitivity analysis for ignition delay times , 2019, Combustion and Flame.

[7]  C. Law,et al.  Evolution of sensitivity directions during autoignition , 2019, Proceedings of the Combustion Institute.

[8]  Zuo-hua Huang,et al.  An experimental and chemical kinetic modeling study of 1,3-butadiene combustion: Ignition delay time and laminar flame speed measurements , 2018, Combustion and Flame.

[9]  Paris Perdikaris,et al.  Physics-informed neural networks: A deep learning framework for solving forward and inverse problems involving nonlinear partial differential equations , 2019, J. Comput. Phys..

[10]  A. Fernandez-Pello,et al.  Application of genetic algorithms and thermogravimetry to determine the kinetics of polyurethane foam in smoldering combustion , 2006 .

[11]  Xiaolong Gou,et al.  A path flux analysis method for the reduction of detailed chemical kinetic mechanisms , 2010 .

[12]  F. Egolfopoulos,et al.  An optimized kinetic model of H2/CO combustion , 2005 .

[13]  T. Faravelli,et al.  An evolutionary, data-driven approach for mechanism optimization: theory and application to ammonia combustion , 2021, Combustion and Flame.

[14]  C. Westbrook,et al.  Kinetic modeling of gasoline surrogate components and mixtures under engine conditions , 2011 .

[15]  Jimmy Ba,et al.  Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization , 2014, ICLR.

[16]  Vaibhav Dixit,et al.  A Comparison of Automatic Differentiation and Continuous Sensitivity Analysis for Derivatives of Differential Equation Solutions , 2018, 2021 IEEE High Performance Extreme Computing Conference (HPEC).

[17]  Zhuyin Ren,et al.  Quantifying kinetic uncertainty in turbulent combustion simulations using active subspaces , 2019 .

[18]  Peng Zhao,et al.  Kinetic modeling of ignition in miniature shock tube , 2019, Proceedings of the Combustion Institute.

[19]  Qiqi Wang,et al.  Erratum: Active Subspace Methods in Theory and Practice: Applications to Kriging Surfaces , 2013, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[20]  Zhuyin Ren,et al.  Uncertainty analysis in mechanism reduction via active subspace and transition state analyses , 2021 .

[21]  R. J. Kee,et al.  Chemkin-II : A Fortran Chemical Kinetics Package for the Analysis of Gas Phase Chemical Kinetics , 1991 .

[22]  Weiqi Ji,et al.  Autonomous Discovery of Unknown Reaction Pathways from Data by Chemical Reaction Neural Network , 2020, The journal of physical chemistry. A.

[23]  Zhuyin Ren,et al.  Active Subspace Variation and Modeling Uncertainty in a Supersonic Flame Simulation , 2021 .

[24]  Martín Abadi,et al.  Dynamic control flow in large-scale machine learning , 2018, EuroSys.

[25]  Michael Frenklach,et al.  Optimization and analysis of large chemical kinetic mechanisms using the solution mapping method—combustion of methane , 1992 .

[26]  M. Vohra,et al.  Subspace-based dimension reduction for chemical kinetics applications with epistemic uncertainty , 2018 .

[27]  Zhuyin Ren,et al.  Shared low-dimensional subspaces for propagating kinetic uncertainty to multiple outputs , 2018 .

[28]  F. Egolfopoulos,et al.  A Physics-based approach to modeling real-fuel combustion chemistry – III. Reaction kinetic model of JP10 , 2018, Combustion and Flame.

[29]  H. Pitsch,et al.  Adjoint-based sensitivity analysis of quantities of interest of complex combustion models , 2018, Combustion Theory and Modelling.

[30]  Xun Huan,et al.  Simulation-based optimal Bayesian experimental design for nonlinear systems , 2011, J. Comput. Phys..

[31]  Ali Ramadhan,et al.  Universal Differential Equations for Scientific Machine Learning , 2020, ArXiv.

[32]  Omar M. Knio,et al.  A tangent linear approximation of the ignition delay time. I: Sensitivity to rate parameters , 2021, Combustion and Flame.

[33]  Qing Nie,et al.  DifferentialEquations.jl – A Performant and Feature-Rich Ecosystem for Solving Differential Equations in Julia , 2017, Journal of Open Research Software.

[34]  Tianfeng Lu,et al.  On the applicability of directed relation graphs to the reduction of reaction mechanisms , 2006 .