An improved approach to Bayesian computer model calibration and prediction

We consider the problem of calibrating inexact computer models using experimental data. To compensate for the misspecification of the computer model, a discrepancy function is usually included and modeled via a Gaussian stochastic process (GaSP), leading to better results of prediction. The calibration parameters in the computer model, however, sometimes become unidentifiable in the GaSP model, and the calibrated computer model fits the experimental data poorly as a consequence. In this work, we propose the scaled Gaussian stochastic process (S-GaSP), a novel stochastic process for calibration and prediction. This new approach bridges the gap between two predominant methods, namely the $L_2$ calibration and GaSP calibration. A computationally feasible approach is introduced for this new model under the Bayesian paradigm. The S-GaSP model not only provides a general framework for calibration, but also enables the computer model to predict well regardless of the discrepancy function. Numerical examples are also provided to illustrate the connections and differences between this new model and other previous approaches.

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

[2]  Rui Paulo Default priors for Gaussian processes , 2005 .

[3]  Jeong Soo Park Tuning complex computer codes to data and optimal designs , 1992 .

[4]  Mengyang Gu Jointly Robust Prior for Gaussian Stochastic Process in Emulation, Calibration and Variable Selection , 2018, Bayesian Analysis.

[5]  K. Feigl,et al.  Radar interferometry and its application to changes in the Earth's surface , 1998 .

[6]  Curtis B. Storlie,et al.  A frequentist approach to computer model calibration , 2014, 1411.4723.

[7]  James O. Berger,et al.  Parallel partial Gaussian process emulation for computer models with massive output , 2016 .

[8]  James O. Berger,et al.  Robust Gaussian stochastic process emulation , 2017, The Annals of Statistics.

[9]  James O. Berger,et al.  Using Statistical and Computer Models to Quantify Volcanic Hazards , 2009, Technometrics.

[10]  Peter Z. G. Qian,et al.  Bayesian Hierarchical Modeling for Integrating Low-Accuracy and High-Accuracy Experiments , 2008, Technometrics.

[11]  James O. Berger,et al.  Modularization in Bayesian analysis, with emphasis on analysis of computer models , 2009 .

[12]  Rui Tuo,et al.  A Theoretical Framework for Calibration in Computer Models: Parametrization, Estimation and Convergence Properties , 2015, SIAM/ASA J. Uncertain. Quantification.

[13]  J. Nocedal Updating Quasi-Newton Matrices With Limited Storage , 1980 .

[14]  J. Berger,et al.  Objective Bayesian Analysis of Spatially Correlated Data , 2001 .

[15]  James O. Berger,et al.  A Framework for Validation of Computer Models , 2007, Technometrics.

[16]  Victor De Oliveira,et al.  Objective Bayesian analysis of spatial data with measurement error , 2007 .

[17]  James O. Berger,et al.  RobustGaSP: Robust Gaussian Stochastic Process Emulation in R , 2018, R J..

[18]  K. Anderson,et al.  Bayesian estimation of magma supply, storage, and eruption rates using a multiphysical volcano model: Kīlauea Volcano, 2000–2012 , 2016 .

[19]  Danilo L. Lopes,et al.  Development and Implementation of Bayesian Computer Model Emulators , 2011 .

[20]  Thomas J. Santner,et al.  The Design and Analysis of Computer Experiments , 2003, Springer Series in Statistics.

[21]  K. Anderson,et al.  Abundant carbon in the mantle beneath Hawai‘i , 2017 .

[22]  M. Plumlee Bayesian Calibration of Inexact Computer Models , 2017 .

[23]  Yves Deville,et al.  DiceKriging, DiceOptim: Two R Packages for the Analysis of Computer Experiments by Kriging-Based Metamodeling and Optimization , 2012 .