Identifiability and interpretability of hybrid, gray-box models

Model identifiability concerns the uniqueness of uncertain model parameters to be estimated from available process data and is often thought of as a prerequisite for physical interpretability of the parameters in a mechanistic model. Nevertheless, model identifiability is rarely accomplished in practice due to both stochastic and deterministic uncertainties: lack of sufficient variability in the data, noisy measurements, erroneous model structure, stochasticity and locality of the optimization algorithm, initial values, and even the parameter of the true underlying process. For gray-box, hybrid models, model identifiability is even less obtainable due to a higher number of parameters compared to mechanistic models. We illustrate by means of an industrial case study, modeling of a production choke valve in a petroleum well, how physical interpretation of the physical model parameters may be preserved for non-identifiable models by utilizing parameter regularization in the estimation problem. Further, we design and train interpretable gray-box choke models on historical process data from six wells on the petroleum asset Edvard Grieg. Comparing the prediction performance of the gray-box model to a mechanistic model for the median well shows a significant increase in prediction accuracy.

[1]  Chi-Tsong Chen,et al.  Linear System Theory and Design , 1995 .

[2]  Ali Lohi,et al.  Applications of hybrid models in chemical, petroleum, and energy systems: A systematic review , 2018, Applied Energy.

[3]  An-Heleen Deconinck,et al.  Is stochastic grey-box modelling suited for physical properties estimation of building components from on-site measurements? , 2017 .

[4]  Lyle H. Ungar,et al.  A hybrid neural network‐first principles approach to process modeling , 1992 .

[5]  Johannes Jäschke,et al.  Combining machine learning and process engineering physics towards enhanced accuracy and explainability of data-driven models , 2020, Comput. Chem. Eng..

[6]  R. Sachdeva,et al.  Two-Phase Flow Through Chokes , 1986 .

[7]  Oluwasanmi Koyejo,et al.  Examples are not enough, learn to criticize! Criticism for Interpretability , 2016, NIPS.

[8]  Ursula Klingmüller,et al.  Structural and practical identifiability analysis of partially observed dynamical models by exploiting the profile likelihood , 2009, Bioinform..

[9]  Xiaomin Li,et al.  Wet Gas Metering Using a Revised Venturi Meter and Soft-Computing Approximation Techniques , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement.

[10]  Jian Sun,et al.  Delving Deep into Rectifiers: Surpassing Human-Level Performance on ImageNet Classification , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV).

[11]  Bjarne Grimstad,et al.  A Simple Data-Driven Approach to Production Estimation and Optimization , 2016 .

[12]  Bjarne Grimstad,et al.  Developing a Hybrid Data-Driven, Mechanistic Virtual Flow Meter - a Case Study , 2020, ArXiv.

[13]  H. Künsch,et al.  Practical identifiability analysis of large environmental simulation models , 2001 .

[14]  M. Kramer,et al.  Embedding Theoretical Models in Neural Networks , 1992, American Control Conference.

[15]  Jorge Nocedal,et al.  Optimization Methods for Large-Scale Machine Learning , 2016, SIAM Rev..

[16]  Guigang Zhang,et al.  Deep Learning , 2016, Int. J. Semantic Comput..

[17]  Jimmy Ba,et al.  Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization , 2014, ICLR.

[18]  Ole Magnus Brastein,et al.  Sensor placement and parameter identi?ability in grey-box models of building thermal behaviour , 2019, Proceedings of The 60th SIMS Conference on Simulation and Modelling SIMS 2019, August 12-16, Västerås, Sweden.

[19]  Aaron Klein,et al.  Fast Bayesian Optimization of Machine Learning Hyperparameters on Large Datasets , 2016, AISTATS.

[20]  Per Christian Hansen,et al.  Some Applications of the Rank Revealing QR Factorization , 1992, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..