Geometric MCMC for infinite-dimensional inverse problems

Bayesian inverse problems often involve sampling posterior distributions on infinite-dimensional function spaces. Traditional Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) algorithms are characterized by deteriorating mixing times upon mesh-refinement, when the finite-dimensional approximations become more accurate. Such methods are typically forced to reduce step-sizes as the discretization gets finer, and thus are expensive as a function of dimension. Recently, a new class of MCMC methods with mesh-independent convergence times has emerged. However, few of them take into account the geometry of the posterior informed by the data. At the same time, recently developed geometric MCMC algorithms have been found to be powerful in exploring complicated distributions that deviate significantly from elliptic Gaussian laws, but are in general computationally intractable for models defined in infinite dimensions. In this work, we combine geometric methods on a finite-dimensional subspace with mesh-independent infinite-dimensional approaches. Our objective is to speed up MCMC mixing times, without significantly increasing the computational cost per step (for instance, in comparison with the vanilla preconditioned Crank–Nicolson (pCN) method). This is achieved by using ideas from geometric MCMC to probe the complex structure of an intrinsic finite-dimensional subspace where most data information concentrates, while retaining robust mixing times as the dimension grows by using pCN-like methods in the complementary subspace. The resulting algorithms are demonstrated in the context of three challenging inverse problems arising in subsurface flow, heat conduction and incompressible flow control. The algorithms exhibit up to two orders of magnitude improvement in sampling efficiency when compared with the pCN method.

[1]  T. Kurtz,et al.  Stochastic equations in infinite dimensions , 2006 .

[2]  Patrick R. Conrad,et al.  Accelerating Asymptotically Exact MCMC for Computationally Intensive Models via Local Approximations , 2014, 1402.1694.

[3]  Andrew M. Stuart,et al.  Uncertainty Quantification and Weak Approximation of an Elliptic Inverse Problem , 2011, SIAM J. Numer. Anal..

[4]  Aaron Smith,et al.  Asymptotically Exact MCMC Algorithms via Local Approximations of Computationally Intensive Models , 2014 .

[5]  A. Stuart,et al.  Spectral gaps for a Metropolis–Hastings algorithm in infinite dimensions , 2011, 1112.1392.

[6]  Tiangang Cui,et al.  Dimension-independent likelihood-informed MCMC , 2014, J. Comput. Phys..

[7]  L. Verlet Computer "Experiments" on Classical Fluids. I. Thermodynamical Properties of Lennard-Jones Molecules , 1967 .

[8]  David A. Ham,et al.  Automated Derivation of the Adjoint of High-Level Transient Finite Element Programs , 2012, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[9]  S. Duane,et al.  Hybrid Monte Carlo , 1987 .

[10]  Mark A. Girolami,et al.  Emulation of higher-order tensors in manifold Monte Carlo methods for Bayesian Inverse Problems , 2015, J. Comput. Phys..

[11]  Paul G. Constantine,et al.  Accelerating Markov Chain Monte Carlo with Active Subspaces , 2016, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[12]  Gideon Simpson,et al.  Algorithms for Kullback-Leibler Approximation of Probability Measures in Infinite Dimensions , 2014, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[13]  James Martin,et al.  A Computational Framework for Infinite-Dimensional Bayesian Inverse Problems, Part II: Stochastic Newton MCMC with Application to Ice Sheet Flow Inverse Problems , 2013, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[14]  Paul G. Constantine,et al.  Accelerating MCMC with active subspaces , 2015, 1510.00024.

[15]  Daniel Rudolf,et al.  On a Generalization of the Preconditioned Crank–Nicolson Metropolis Algorithm , 2015, Found. Comput. Math..

[16]  L. Tierney A note on Metropolis-Hastings kernels for general state spaces , 1998 .

[17]  M. Girolami,et al.  Solving large-scale PDE-constrained Bayesian inverse problems with Riemann manifold Hamiltonian Monte Carlo , 2014, 1407.1517.

[18]  G. Roberts,et al.  MCMC methods for diffusion bridges , 2008 .

[19]  Radford M. Neal MCMC Using Hamiltonian Dynamics , 2011, 1206.1901.

[20]  Kody J. H. Law Proposals which speed up function-space MCMC , 2014, J. Comput. Appl. Math..

[21]  G. G. Stokes "J." , 1890, The New Yale Book of Quotations.

[22]  Anders Logg,et al.  The FEniCS Project Version 1.5 , 2015 .

[23]  A. Gelman,et al.  Weak convergence and optimal scaling of random walk Metropolis algorithms , 1997 .

[24]  G. Roberts,et al.  MCMC Methods for Functions: ModifyingOld Algorithms to Make Them Faster , 2012, 1202.0709.

[25]  M. Girolami,et al.  Markov Chain Monte Carlo from Lagrangian Dynamics , 2015, Journal of computational and graphical statistics : a joint publication of American Statistical Association, Institute of Mathematical Statistics, Interface Foundation of North America.

[26]  M. Girolami,et al.  Riemann manifold Langevin and Hamiltonian Monte Carlo methods , 2011, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology).

[27]  A. Marsden,et al.  A comparison of outlet boundary treatments for prevention of backflow divergence with relevance to blood flow simulations , 2011 .

[28]  M. Girolami,et al.  Lagrangian Dynamical Monte Carlo , 2012, 1211.3759.

[29]  M. Girolami,et al.  Langevin diffusions and the Metropolis-adjusted Langevin algorithm , 2013, 1309.2983.

[30]  David Higdon,et al.  Adaptive Hessian-Based Nonstationary Gaussian Process Response Surface Method for Probability Density Approximation with Application to Bayesian Solution of Large-Scale Inverse Problems , 2012, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[31]  Alexandros Beskos,et al.  Advanced MCMC methods for sampling on diffusion pathspace , 2012, 1203.6216.

[32]  J. M. Sanz-Serna,et al.  Hybrid Monte Carlo on Hilbert spaces , 2011 .

[33]  A. Stuart,et al.  The Bayesian Approach to Inverse Problems , 2013, 1302.6989.

[34]  Anders Logg,et al.  Automated Solution of Differential Equations by the Finite Element Method: The FEniCS Book , 2012 .

[35]  James Martin,et al.  A Stochastic Newton MCMC Method for Large-Scale Statistical Inverse Problems with Application to Seismic Inversion , 2012, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[36]  K. Chung Lectures from Markov processes to Brownian motion , 1982 .

[37]  T. Bui-Thanh,et al.  FEM-based discretization-invariant MCMC methods for PDE-constrained Bayesian inverse problems , 2016 .

[38]  T. O’Neil Geometric Measure Theory , 2002 .

[39]  R. Adler The Geometry of Random Fields , 2009 .

[40]  Johannes Janicka,et al.  Investigation of the influence of the Reynolds number on a plane jet using direct numerical simulation , 2003 .

[41]  Paul G. Constantine,et al.  Active Subspaces - Emerging Ideas for Dimension Reduction in Parameter Studies , 2015, SIAM spotlights.

[42]  V. Bogachev Gaussian Measures on a , 2022 .

[43]  Tiangang Cui,et al.  Likelihood-informed dimension reduction for nonlinear inverse problems , 2014, 1403.4680.

[44]  James Martin,et al.  A Computational Framework for Infinite-Dimensional Bayesian Inverse Problems Part I: The Linearized Case, with Application to Global Seismic Inversion , 2013, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..