Efficient uncertainty quantification with the polynomial chaos method for stiff systems

The polynomial chaos (PC) method has been widely adopted as a computationally feasible approach for uncertainty quantification (UQ). Most studies to date have focused on non-stiff systems. When stiff systems are considered, implicit numerical integration requires the solution of a non-linear system of equations at every time step. Using the Galerkin approach the size of the system state increases from n to Sxn, where S is the number of PC basis functions. Solving such systems with full linear algebra causes the computational cost to increase from O(n^3) to O(S^3n^3). The S^3-fold increase can make the computation prohibitive. This paper explores computationally efficient UQ techniques for stiff systems using the PC Galerkin, collocation, and collocation least-squares (LS) formulations. In the Galerkin approach, we propose a modification in the implicit time stepping process using an approximation of the Jacobian matrix to reduce the computational cost. The numerical results show a run time reduction with no negative impact on accuracy. In the stochastic collocation formulation, we propose a least-squares approach based on collocation at a low-discrepancy set of points. Numerical experiments illustrate that the collocation least-squares approach for UQ has similar accuracy with the Galerkin approach, is more efficient, and does not require any modification of the original code.

[1]  I. Sobol On the distribution of points in a cube and the approximate evaluation of integrals , 1967 .

[2]  Guillermo Rein,et al.  44th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit , 2006 .

[3]  D. Xiu,et al.  Modeling Uncertainty in Steady State Diffusion Problems via Generalized Polynomial Chaos , 2002 .

[4]  Nicholas Zabaras,et al.  A non-intrusive stochastic Galerkin approach for modeling uncertainty propagation in deformation processes , 2007 .

[5]  Willem Hundsdorfer,et al.  A Second-Order Rosenbrock Method Applied to Photochemical Dispersion Problems , 1999, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[6]  P G Georgopoulos,et al.  Efficient Sensitivity/Uncertainty Analysis Using the Combined Stochastic Response Surface Method and Automated Differentiation: Application to Environmental and Biological Systems , 2000, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[7]  Adrian Sandu,et al.  Modeling multibody systems with uncertainties. Part II: Numerical applications , 2006 .

[8]  H. Niederreiter Quasi-Monte Carlo methods and pseudo-random numbers , 1978 .

[9]  Adrian Sandu,et al.  Modeling Multibody Dynamic Systems With Uncertainties . Part I : Theoretical and Computational Aspects , 2004 .

[10]  Dongbin Xiu,et al.  The Wiener-Askey Polynomial Chaos for Stochastic Differential Equations , 2002, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[11]  Ronald L. Wasserstein,et al.  Monte Carlo: Concepts, Algorithms, and Applications , 1997 .

[12]  Adrian Sandu,et al.  Technical note: Simulating chemical systems in Fortran90 and Matlab with the Kinetic PreProcessor KPP-2.1 , 2005 .

[13]  Richard J. Beckman,et al.  A Comparison of Three Methods for Selecting Values of Input Variables in the Analysis of Output From a Computer Code , 2000, Technometrics.

[14]  Adrian Sandu,et al.  Benchmarking stiff ode solvers for atmospheric chemistry problems II: Rosenbrock solvers , 1997 .

[15]  H. Najm,et al.  Uncertainty quantification in reacting-flow simulations through non-intrusive spectral projection , 2003 .

[16]  Adrian Sandu,et al.  Modeling Multibody Systems with Uncertainties. Part I: Theoretical and Computational Aspects , 2006 .

[17]  Habib N. Najm,et al.  Numerical Challenges in the Use of Polynomial Chaos Representations for Stochastic Processes , 2005, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[18]  R. Ghanem,et al.  Stochastic Finite Elements: A Spectral Approach , 1990 .

[19]  Roger G. Ghanem,et al.  An equation-free, multiscale approach to uncertainty quantification , 2005, Computing in Science & Engineering.

[20]  Menner A Tatang,et al.  Direct incorporation of uncertainty in chemical and environmental engineering systems , 1995 .

[21]  O. L. Maître,et al.  Protein labeling reactions in electrochemical microchannel flow: Numerical simulation and uncertainty propagation , 2003 .

[22]  Jan Verwer,et al.  A new approximate matrix factorization for implicit time integration in air pollution modeling , 2003 .

[23]  D. Xiu Efficient collocational approach for parametric uncertainty analysis , 2007 .

[24]  Robert L. Smith,et al.  Efficient Monte Carlo Procedures for Generating Points Uniformly Distributed over Bounded Regions , 1984, Oper. Res..

[25]  Russel E. Caflisch,et al.  Quasi-Random Sequences and Their Discrepancies , 1994, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[26]  Florian A. Potra,et al.  The kinetic preprocessor KPP*/a software environment for solving chemical kinetics , 2002 .

[27]  E. Hairer,et al.  Solving Ordinary Differential Equations II: Stiff and Differential-Algebraic Problems , 2010 .

[28]  R. Ghanem,et al.  Uncertainty propagation using Wiener-Haar expansions , 2004 .

[29]  W. J. Whiten,et al.  Computational investigations of low-discrepancy sequences , 1997, TOMS.

[30]  Jun S. Liu,et al.  Monte Carlo strategies in scientific computing , 2001 .

[31]  Adrian Sandu,et al.  Modeling Multibody Dynamic Systems With Uncertainties . Part II : Numerical Applications , 2004 .

[32]  N. Wiener The Homogeneous Chaos , 1938 .

[33]  Fabio Nobile,et al.  A Sparse Grid Stochastic Collocation Method for Partial Differential Equations with Random Input Data , 2008, SIAM J. Numer. Anal..

[34]  J. Hammersley MONTE CARLO METHODS FOR SOLVING MULTIVARIABLE PROBLEMS , 1960 .

[35]  R. Tempone,et al.  A sparse grid stochastic collocation method for elliptic partial differential equations with random input data , 2006 .

[36]  Jon C. Helton,et al.  Mathematical representation of uncertainty , 2001 .

[37]  Erich Novak,et al.  High dimensional polynomial interpolation on sparse grids , 2000, Adv. Comput. Math..