Nested polynomial trends for the improvement of Gaussian process-based predictors

The role of simulation has kept increasing for the sensitivity analysis and the uncertainty quantification of complex systems. Such numerical procedures are generally based on the processing of a huge amount of code evaluations. When the computational cost associated with one particular evaluation of the code is high, such direct approaches based on the computer code only can be not affordable. Surrogate models have therefore to be introduced to interpolate the information given by a fixed set of code evaluations to the whole input space. When confronted to deterministic mappings, the Gaussian process-based regression (GPR), or kriging, presents a good compromise between complexity, efficiency and error control. Such a method considers the quantity of interest of the system as a particular realization of a Gaussian stochastic process, which mean and covariance functions have to be identified from the available code evaluations. In this context, this work proposes an innovative parameterization of this mean function, which is based on the composition of two polynomials. This approach is particularly relevant for the approximation of strongly non linear quantities of interest from very little information. After presenting the theoretical basis of this method, this work compares its efficiency to alternative approaches on a series of examples.

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

[2]  Robert B. Gramacy,et al.  Cases for the nugget in modeling computer experiments , 2010, Statistics and Computing.

[3]  Bruno Sudret,et al.  Sparse polynomial chaos expansions based on an adaptive Least Angle Regression algorithm , 2009 .

[4]  A. O'Hagan,et al.  Curve Fitting and Optimal Design for Prediction , 1978 .

[5]  Bruno Sudret,et al.  Polynomial meta-models with canonical low-rank approximations: Numerical insights and comparison to sparse polynomial chaos expansions , 2015, J. Comput. Phys..

[6]  Roger G. Ghanem,et al.  Physical Systems with Random Uncertainties: Chaos Representations with Arbitrary Probability Measure , 2005, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[7]  D. Anderson,et al.  Algorithms for minimization without derivatives , 1974 .

[8]  Harold J. Kushner,et al.  A new method of locating the maximum point of an arbitrary multipeak curve in the presence of noise , 1963 .

[9]  Eric R. Ziegel,et al.  The Elements of Statistical Learning , 2003, Technometrics.

[10]  R. Brent Table errata: Algorithms for minimization without derivatives (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N. J., 1973) , 1975 .

[11]  Agus Sudjianto,et al.  Blind Kriging: A New Method for Developing Metamodels , 2008 .

[12]  Carl E. Rasmussen,et al.  Gaussian processes for machine learning , 2005, Adaptive computation and machine learning.

[13]  M. Eldred,et al.  Efficient Global Reliability Analysis for Nonlinear Implicit Performance Functions , 2008 .

[14]  Thomas J. Santner,et al.  Design and analysis of computer experiments , 1998 .

[15]  Rupert G. Miller The jackknife-a review , 1974 .

[16]  Ling Li,et al.  Sequential design of computer experiments for the estimation of a probability of failure , 2010, Statistics and Computing.

[17]  R. Tibshirani,et al.  Least angle regression , 2004, math/0406456.

[18]  R. Ghanem,et al.  Polynomial Chaos in Stochastic Finite Elements , 1990 .

[19]  Khachik Sargsyan,et al.  Enhancing ℓ1-minimization estimates of polynomial chaos expansions using basis selection , 2014, J. Comput. Phys..

[20]  A. Nouy Proper Generalized Decompositions and Separated Representations for the Numerical Solution of High Dimensional Stochastic Problems , 2010 .

[21]  Ilias Bilionis,et al.  Multi-output separable Gaussian process: Towards an efficient, fully Bayesian paradigm for uncertainty quantification , 2013, J. Comput. Phys..

[22]  J. Hammersley SIMULATION AND THE MONTE CARLO METHOD , 1982 .

[23]  Joe Wiart,et al.  A new surrogate modeling technique combining Kriging and polynomial chaos expansions - Application to uncertainty analysis in computational dosimetry , 2015, J. Comput. Phys..

[24]  C. Soize,et al.  A Posteriori Error and Optimal Reduced Basis for Stochastic Processes Defined by a Finite Set of Realizations , 2014, SIAM/ASA J. Uncertain. Quantification.

[25]  Roger G. Ghanem,et al.  Polynomial chaos representation of spatio-temporal random fields from experimental measurements , 2009, J. Comput. Phys..

[26]  Roger G. Ghanem,et al.  Identification of Bayesian posteriors for coefficients of chaos expansions , 2010, J. Comput. Phys..

[27]  M. Stein,et al.  A Bayesian analysis of kriging , 1993 .

[28]  Olivier Dubrule,et al.  Cross validation of kriging in a unique neighborhood , 1983 .

[29]  A. O'Hagan,et al.  Bayesian inference for the uncertainty distribution of computer model outputs , 2002 .

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

[31]  E. Parzen An Approach to Time Series Analysis , 1961 .

[32]  G. PERRIN,et al.  Identification of Polynomial Chaos Representations in High Dimension from a Set of Realizations , 2012, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[33]  Omar M. Knio,et al.  Spectral Methods for Uncertainty Quantification , 2010 .

[34]  R. Tibshirani Regression Shrinkage and Selection via the Lasso , 1996 .