Use of Kriging Models to Approximate Deterministic Computer Models

The use of kriging models for approximation and metamodel-based design and optimization has been steadily on the rise in the past decade. The widespread usage of kriging models appears to be hampered by (1) the lack of guidance in selecting the appropriate form of the kriging model, (2) computationally efficient algorithms for estimating the model’s parameters, and (3) an effective method to assess the resulting model’s quality. In this paper, we compare (1) Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE) and Cross-Validation (CV) parameter estimation methods for selecting a kriging model’s parameters given its form and (2) and an R 2 of prediction and the corrected Akaike Information Criterion for assessing the quality of the created kriging model, permitting the comparison of different forms of a kriging model. These methods are demonstrated with six test problems. Finally, different forms of kriging models are examined to determine if more complex forms are more accurate and easier to fit than simple forms of kriging models for approximating computer models.

[1]  D. Faddeev,et al.  Computational Methods of Linear Algebra , 1959 .

[2]  A. Goldberger Best Linear Unbiased Prediction in the Generalized Linear Regression Model , 1962 .

[3]  G. Matheron Principles of geostatistics , 1963 .

[4]  John A. Nelder,et al.  A Simplex Method for Function Minimization , 1965, Comput. J..

[5]  S. Shapiro,et al.  An Analysis of Variance Test for Normality (Complete Samples) , 1965 .

[6]  P. C. Gehlen,et al.  Computer Experiments , 1996 .

[7]  H. Akaike A new look at the statistical model identification , 1974 .

[8]  S. Geisser,et al.  A Predictive Approach to Model Selection , 1979 .

[9]  Calyampudi R. Rao Handbook of statistics , 1980 .

[10]  K. Mardia,et al.  Maximum likelihood estimation of models for residual covariance in spatial regression , 1984 .

[11]  G. Wahba A Comparison of GCV and GML for Choosing the Smoothing Parameter in the Generalized Spline Smoothing Problem , 1985 .

[12]  P. Kitanidis Parameter Uncertainty in Estimation of Spatial Functions: Bayesian Analysis , 1986 .

[13]  Brian D. Ripley,et al.  Problems with likelihood estimation of covariance functions of spatial Gaussian processes , 1987 .

[14]  C. Currin,et al.  A Bayesian Approach to the Design and Analysis of Computer Experiments , 1988 .

[15]  A. V. Vecchia Estimation and model identification for continuous spatial processes , 1988 .

[16]  B. Ripley Statistical inference for spatial processes , 1990 .

[17]  Kanti V. Mardia,et al.  On multimodality of the likelihood in the spatial linear model , 1989 .

[18]  Michael L. Stein,et al.  A Comparison of Generalized Cross Validation and Modified Maximum Likelihood for Estimating the Parameters of a Stochastic Process , 1990 .

[19]  G. Wahba Spline models for observational data , 1990 .

[20]  T. J. Mitchell,et al.  Bayesian Prediction of Deterministic Functions, with Applications to the Design and Analysis of Computer Experiments , 1991 .

[21]  P. Royston A Toolkit for Testing for Non‐Normality in Complete and Censored Samples , 1993 .

[22]  Robert Haining,et al.  Statistics for spatial data: by Noel Cressie, 1991, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 900 p., ISBN 0-471-84336-9, US $89.95 , 1993 .

[23]  Hartmut Bossel,et al.  Modeling and simulation , 1994 .

[24]  R. Ababou,et al.  On the condition number of covariance matrices in kriging, estimation, and simulation of random fields , 1994 .

[25]  Geoffrey M. Laslett,et al.  Kriging and Splines: An Empirical Comparison of their Predictive Performance in Some Applications , 1994 .

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

[27]  P. Royston A Remark on Algorithm as 181: The W‐Test for Normality , 1995 .

[28]  Cristina H. Amon,et al.  An engineering design methodology with multistage Bayesian surrogates and optimal sampling , 1996 .

[29]  R. H. Myers,et al.  Response Surface Methodology: Process and Product Optimization Using Designed Experiments , 1995 .

[30]  Art B. Owen,et al.  9 Computer experiments , 1996, Design and analysis of experiments.

[31]  Rainer Storn,et al.  Differential Evolution – A Simple and Efficient Heuristic for global Optimization over Continuous Spaces , 1997, J. Glob. Optim..

[32]  R. Storn,et al.  Differential Evolution - A simple and efficient adaptive scheme for global optimization over continuous spaces , 2004 .

[33]  Max D. Morris,et al.  Six factors which affect the condition number of matrices associated with kriging , 1997 .

[34]  James P. Braselton,et al.  Statistics with Mathematica , 1998 .

[35]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Comparison of Akaike information criterion and consistent Akaike information criterion for model selection and statistical inference from capture-recapture studies , 1998 .

[36]  Andrew Booker,et al.  Design and analysis of computer experiments , 1998 .

[37]  Timothy W. Simpson,et al.  Comparison of Response Surface and Kriging Models in the Multidisciplinary Design of an Aerospike Nozzle , 1998 .

[38]  Russell R. Barton,et al.  Simulation metamodels , 1998, 1998 Winter Simulation Conference. Proceedings (Cat. No.98CH36274).

[39]  T. W. Layne,et al.  A Comparison of Approximation Modeling Techniques: Polynomial Versus Interpolating Models , 1998 .

[40]  Donald R. Jones,et al.  Efficient Global Optimization of Expensive Black-Box Functions , 1998, J. Glob. Optim..

[41]  A. J. Booker,et al.  A rigorous framework for optimization of expensive functions by surrogates , 1998 .

[42]  Michael L. Stein,et al.  Interpolation of spatial data , 1999 .

[43]  M. D. McKay,et al.  A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code , 2000 .

[44]  Timothy C. Coburn,et al.  Geostatistics for Natural Resources Evaluation , 2000, Technometrics.

[45]  T. Simpson,et al.  Comparative studies of metamodeling techniques under multiple modeling criteria , 2000 .

[46]  Roger Woodard,et al.  Interpolation of Spatial Data: Some Theory for Kriging , 1999, Technometrics.

[47]  John E. Renaud,et al.  MODELING AND SIMULATION UNCERTAINTY IN MULTIDISCIPLINARY DESIGN OPTIMIZATION , 2000 .

[48]  Timothy W. Simpson,et al.  Metamodels for Computer-based Engineering Design: Survey and recommendations , 2001, Engineering with Computers.

[49]  Martin Meckesheimer,et al.  A FRAMEWORK FOR METAMODEL-BASED DESIGN: SUBSYSTEM METAMODEL ASSESSMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES , 2001 .

[50]  T. Simpson,et al.  Comparative studies of metamodelling techniques under multiple modelling criteria , 2001 .

[51]  Farrokh Mistree,et al.  Kriging Models for Global Approximation in Simulation-Based Multidisciplinary Design Optimization , 2001 .

[52]  Michael James Sasena,et al.  Flexibility and efficiency enhancements for constrained global design optimization with kriging approximations. , 2002 .

[53]  Timothy W. Simpson,et al.  FACILITATING PROBABILISTIC MULTIDISCIPLINARY DESIGN OPTIMIZATION USING KRIGING APPROXIMATION MODELS , 2002 .

[54]  T. Simpson,et al.  Computationally Inexpensive Metamodel Assessment Strategies , 2002 .

[55]  Jay D. Martin,et al.  USE OF ADAPTIVE METAMODELING FOR DESIGN OPTIMIZATION , 2002 .

[56]  Ruichen Jin,et al.  On Sequential Sampling for Global Metamodeling in Engineering Design , 2002, DAC 2002.

[57]  T. Simpson,et al.  A Study on the Use of Kriging Models to Approximate Deterministic Computer Models , 2003, DAC 2003.

[58]  Jack P. C. Kleijnen,et al.  Kriging for interpolation in random simulation , 2003, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[59]  Cristina H. Amon,et al.  Bayesian Surrogates Applied to Conceptual Stages of the Engineering Design Process , 2003 .

[60]  Jay D. Martin,et al.  On Using Kriging Models as Probabilistic Models in Design , 2004 .

[61]  T. Simpson,et al.  A Monte Carlo Simulation of the Kriging Model , 2004 .

[62]  Ren-Jye Yang,et al.  Approximation methods in multidisciplinary analysis and optimization: a panel discussion , 2004 .

[63]  Timothy W. Simpson,et al.  On the Use of Kriging Models to Approximate Deterministic Computer Models , 2004, DAC 2004.

[64]  Ren-Jye Yang,et al.  Metamodeling development for vehicle frontal impact simulation , 2001, DAC 2001.

[65]  Raphael T. Haftka,et al.  Surrogate-based Analysis and Optimization , 2005 .

[66]  Brian D. Ripley,et al.  Spatial Statistics: Ripley/Spatial Statistics , 2005 .

[67]  Bryan Glaz,et al.  Efficient Global Optimization of Helicopter Rotor Blades for Vibration Reduction in Forward Flight , 2006 .

[68]  Jay D. Martin,et al.  A Methodology to Manage System-level Uncertainty During Conceptual Design , 2006 .

[69]  Daniel W. Apley,et al.  Understanding the Effects of Model Uncertainty in Robust Design With Computer Experiments , 2006 .

[70]  K. Kalniņš,et al.  Metamodeling approach for analysis of post-buckling in composite panels with structural degradation , 2006 .

[71]  Jay D. Martin,et al.  A Monte Carlo Method for Reliability-Based Design Opitmization , 2006 .

[72]  Shawn E. Gano,et al.  Update strategies for kriging models used in variable fidelity optimization , 2006 .

[73]  F. Scholz Maximum Likelihood Estimation , 2006 .

[74]  Salvador A. Pintos,et al.  Toward an optimal ensemble of kernel-based approximations with engineering applications , 2006 .

[75]  Wei Chen,et al.  A non‐stationary covariance‐based Kriging method for metamodelling in engineering design , 2007 .

[76]  G. Gary Wang,et al.  Review of Metamodeling Techniques in Support of Engineering Design Optimization , 2007 .

[77]  Kwang‐Yong Kim,et al.  Evaluation of Surrogate Models in Optimization of Wire-Wrapped Fuel Assembly , 2007 .

[78]  R. Haftka,et al.  Ensemble of surrogates , 2007 .