Validation of Physical Models in the Presence of Uncertainty

Over the last century, the field of computational modeling has grown tremendously, from virtually non-existent to pervasive. During this time, simultaneous advances in simulation algorithms and computer hardware have enabled the development and application of increasingly complicated and detailed models to represent evermore complex physical phenomena. These advances are revolutionizing the ways in which models are used in the design and analysis of complex systems, enabling simulation results to be used in support of critical design and operational decisions [25, 1]. With continued advances in models, algorithms, and hardware, numerical simulations will only become more critical in modern science and engineering. Given the importance of computational modeling, it is increasingly important to assess the reliability, in light of the purpose of a given simulation, of the models that form the basis of computational simulations. This reliability assessment is the domain of validation. While the concept of model validation is not new, it has recently received renewed attention due to the rapid growth in the use of models as a basis for making decisions [3, 5, 29]. This article provides an overview of the state-of-the-art in validation of physical models in the presence of uncertainty. In science and engineering, the word validation is often used to refer to simple comparisons between model outputs and experimental data such as plotting the model results and data on the same axes to allow visual assessment of agreement or lack thereof. While comparisons between model and data are at the core of any validation procedure, there are a number of problems with such naive comparisons.

[1]  David B. Dunson,et al.  Bayesian Data Analysis , 2010 .

[2]  Andrew Gelman Comment: Bayesian Checking of the Second Levels of Hierarchical Models , 2007 .

[3]  George E. P. Box,et al.  Sampling and Bayes' inference in scientific modelling and robustness , 1980 .

[4]  D. Rubin Bayesianly Justifiable and Relevant Frequency Calculations for the Applied Statistician , 1984 .

[5]  Gopal K. Kanji,et al.  100 statistical tests 3rd edition , 2006 .

[6]  R. T. Cox,et al.  The Algebra of Probable Inference , 1962 .

[7]  G. C. Tiao,et al.  Bayesian inference in statistical analysis , 1973 .

[8]  R. Baierlein Probability Theory: The Logic of Science , 2004 .

[9]  Todd A. Oliver,et al.  Validating predictions of unobserved quantities , 2014, 1404.7555.

[10]  Jon C. Helton,et al.  Mathematical representation of uncertainty , 2001 .

[11]  Sylvain Arlot,et al.  A survey of cross-validation procedures for model selection , 2009, 0907.4728.

[12]  Constru ting Constructing a Logic of Plausible Inference: a Guide To Cox's Theorem , 2003 .

[13]  J. Hsu Multiple Comparisons: Theory and Methods , 1996 .

[14]  Glenn Shafer,et al.  A Mathematical Theory of Evidence , 2020, A Mathematical Theory of Evidence.

[15]  Xiao-Li Meng,et al.  POSTERIOR PREDICTIVE ASSESSMENT OF MODEL FITNESS VIA REALIZED DISCREPANCIES , 1996 .

[16]  Loren K. Miller Simulation-Based Engineering for Industrial Competitive Advantage , 2010, Computing in Science & Engineering.

[17]  S. Ferson,et al.  Different methods are needed to propagate ignorance and variability , 1996 .

[18]  R. Ghanem,et al.  Uncertainty propagation using Wiener-Haar expansions , 2004 .

[19]  Cosma Rohilla Shalizi,et al.  Philosophy and the practice of Bayesian statistics. , 2010, The British journal of mathematical and statistical psychology.

[20]  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..

[21]  J. Hartigan Theories of Probability , 1983 .

[22]  Rob J Hyndman,et al.  Computing and Graphing Highest Density Regions , 1996 .

[23]  Didier Dubois,et al.  Possibility Theory - An Approach to Computerized Processing of Uncertainty , 1988 .

[24]  Michael S. Eldred,et al.  DAKOTA : a multilevel parallel object-oriented framework for design optimization, parameter estimation, uncertainty quantification, and sensitivity analysis. Version 5.0, user's reference manual. , 2010 .

[25]  Gopal Kanji,et al.  100 Statistical Tests , 1994 .

[26]  Kari Sentz,et al.  Combination of Evidence in Dempster-Shafer Theory , 2002 .

[27]  Thorsten Dickhaus,et al.  Simultaneous Statistical Inference , 2014, Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

[28]  StatisticsHarvard,et al.  Avoiding model selection in Bayesian social research , 1994 .

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

[30]  Habib N. Najm,et al.  Uncertainty Quantification and Polynomial Chaos Techniques in Computational Fluid Dynamics , 2009 .

[31]  P. Hewson Bayesian Data Analysis 3rd edn A. Gelman, J. B. Carlin, H. S. Stern, D. B. Dunson, A. Vehtari and D. B. Rubin, 2013 Boca Raton, Chapman and Hall–CRC 676 pp., £44.99 ISBN 1‐439‐84095‐4 , 2015 .

[32]  R. T. Cox The Algebra of Probable Inference , 1962 .

[33]  I. Babuska,et al.  Reliability of computational science , 2007 .

[34]  C. Howson Theories of Probability , 1995 .

[35]  Jinglai Li,et al.  Adaptive Construction of Surrogates for the Bayesian Solution of Inverse Problems , 2013, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..