Multi-Metric Validation Under Uncertainty for Multivariate Model Outputs and Limited Measurements

IF 0.5 Q4 ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL Journal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification Pub Date : 2022-12-22 DOI:10.1115/1.4056548
Andrew White, S. Mahadevan, Jason Schmucker, Alexander Karl
{"title":"Multi-Metric Validation Under Uncertainty for Multivariate Model Outputs and Limited Measurements","authors":"Andrew White, S. Mahadevan, Jason Schmucker, Alexander Karl","doi":"10.1115/1.4056548","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Model validation for real-world systems involves multiple sources of uncertainty, multivariate model outputs, and often a limited number of measurement samples. These factors preclude the use of many existing validation metrics, or at least limit the ability of the practitioner to derive insights from computed metrics. This paper seeks to extend the area metric (univariate only) and the model reliability metric (univariate and multivariate) to account for these issues. The model reliability metric was found to be more extendable to multivariate outputs, whereas the area metric presented some difficulties. Metrics of different types (area and model reliability), dimensionality (univariate and multivariate), and objective (bias effects, shape effects, or both) are used together in a ‘multi-metric’ approach that provides a more informative validation assessment. The univariate metrics can be used for output-by-output model diagnosis and the multivariate metrics contributes an overall model assessment that includes correlation among the outputs. The extensions to the validation metrics in this paper address limited measurement sample size, improve the interpretability of the metric results by separating the effects of distribution bias and shape, and enhance the model reliability metric's tolerance parameter. The proposed validation approach is demonstrated with a bivariate numerical example and then applied to a gas turbine engine heat transfer model.","PeriodicalId":52254,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4056548","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Model validation for real-world systems involves multiple sources of uncertainty, multivariate model outputs, and often a limited number of measurement samples. These factors preclude the use of many existing validation metrics, or at least limit the ability of the practitioner to derive insights from computed metrics. This paper seeks to extend the area metric (univariate only) and the model reliability metric (univariate and multivariate) to account for these issues. The model reliability metric was found to be more extendable to multivariate outputs, whereas the area metric presented some difficulties. Metrics of different types (area and model reliability), dimensionality (univariate and multivariate), and objective (bias effects, shape effects, or both) are used together in a ‘multi-metric’ approach that provides a more informative validation assessment. The univariate metrics can be used for output-by-output model diagnosis and the multivariate metrics contributes an overall model assessment that includes correlation among the outputs. The extensions to the validation metrics in this paper address limited measurement sample size, improve the interpretability of the metric results by separating the effects of distribution bias and shape, and enhance the model reliability metric's tolerance parameter. The proposed validation approach is demonstrated with a bivariate numerical example and then applied to a gas turbine engine heat transfer model.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
多变量模型输出和有限测量不确定度下的多指标验证
真实世界系统的模型验证涉及多个不确定性来源、多变量模型输出,以及通常数量有限的测量样本。这些因素排除了许多现有验证度量的使用,或者至少限制了从业者从计算度量中获得见解的能力。本文试图扩展面积度量(仅限单变量)和模型可靠性度量(单变量和多变量)来解释这些问题。模型可靠性度量被发现更容易扩展到多变量输出,而面积度量则存在一些困难。不同类型(面积和模型可靠性)、维度(单变量和多变量)和目标(偏差效应、形状效应或两者兼有)的指标在“多指标”方法中一起使用,该方法提供了更具信息性的验证评估。单变量度量可用于逐输出模型诊断,并且多变量度量有助于包括输出之间的相关性的整体模型评估。本文对验证度量的扩展解决了测量样本量有限的问题,通过分离分布偏差和形状的影响来提高度量结果的可解释性,并增强了模型可靠性度量的容差参数。通过一个二元数值例子验证了所提出的验证方法,并将其应用于燃气轮机发动机传热模型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
16.70%
发文量
12
期刊最新文献
A Curved Surface Integral Method for Reliability Analysis of Multiple Failure Modes System with Non-Overlapping Failure Domains A Framework for Developing Systematic Testbeds for Multi-Fidelity Optimization Techniques Reliability Analysis for RV Reducer by Combining PCE and Saddlepoint Approximation Considering Multi-Failure Modes Machine Learning-Based Resilience Modeling and Assessment of High Consequence Systems Under Uncertainty Posterior Covariance Matrix Approximations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1