UNCERTAINTY, VALIDATION OF COMPUTER MODELS AND THE MYTH OF NUMERICAL PREDICTABILITY

This publication addresses the issues of modeling, uncertainty quantification, model validation and numerical predictability. With the increasing role of numerical simulation in science, technology as well as every day decision-making, assessing the predictive accuracy of computer models becomes essential. Conventional approaches such as finite element model updating or Bayesian inference are undeniably useful tools but they do not fully answer the question: How accurately does the model represent reality? First, the evolution of scientific computing and consequences in terms of modeling and analysis practices are discussed. The intimate relationship between modeling and uncertainty is explored by defining uncertainty as an integrate part of the model, not just parametric variability or the lack of knowledge about the physical system being investigated. Examples from nuclear physics and structural dynamics are provided to illustrate issues related to uncertainty, validation and predictability. Finally, feature extraction or the characterization of the dynamics of interest from time series is discussed.

[1]  François M. Hemez,et al.  Design of Computer Experiments for Improving an Impact Test Simulation , 2000 .

[2]  R. C. Malone,et al.  Global eddy-resolving ocean simulations driven by 1985-1995 atmospheric winds , 1998 .

[3]  Y. B-H,et al.  USABILITY OF MATHEMATICAL MODELS IN MECHANICAL DECISION PROCESSES , 1998 .

[4]  R. J. Sherwood,et al.  Paradyn a parallel nonlinear, explicit, three-dimensional finite-element code for solid and structural mechanics user manual , 2000 .

[5]  Jane M. Booker,et al.  Inference from Rossi traces , 2001 .

[6]  Douglas C. Montgomery,et al.  Response Surface Methodology: Process and Product Optimization Using Designed Experiments , 1995 .

[7]  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.

[8]  Heekuck Oh,et al.  Neural Networks for Pattern Recognition , 1993, Adv. Comput..

[9]  A. Raftery,et al.  Inference for Deterministic Simulation Models: The Bayesian Melding Approach , 2000 .

[10]  Giorgio Dalpiaz,et al.  CONDITION MONITORING AND DIAGNOSTICS IN AUTOMATIC MACHINES: COMPARISON OF VIBRATION ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES , 1997 .

[11]  Kenneth M. Hanson,et al.  Posterior sampling with improved efficiency , 1998, Medical Imaging.

[12]  Lih-Yuan Deng,et al.  Orthogonal Arrays: Theory and Applications , 1999, Technometrics.

[13]  P. Simard,et al.  FRACTAL APPROACH FOR SIGNAL PROCESSING AND APPLICATION TO THE DIAGNOSIS OF CAVITATION , 2000 .

[14]  G. Kerschen,et al.  Parameter identification of nonlinear mechanical systems using Proper Orthogonal Decomposition , 2000 .

[15]  Sylvia Richardson,et al.  Markov Chain Monte Carlo in Practice , 1997 .

[16]  A. O'Hagan,et al.  Bayesian calibration of computer models , 2001 .

[17]  J. Schultz,et al.  VALIDATION OF TRANSIENT STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS SIMULATIONS: AN EXAMPLE , 2001 .

[18]  J. Kacprzyk,et al.  Advances in the Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence , 1994 .

[19]  John Garcia.  THE NEED FOR COMPUTATIONAL MODEL VALIDATION , 2001 .

[20]  François M. Hemez,et al.  Model validation for a complex jointed structure , 2000 .