skip to main content
10.1145/1233341.1233408acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagesacm-seConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Numerical study of uncertainty quantification techniques for implicit stiff systems

Authors Info & Claims
Published:23 March 2007Publication History

ABSTRACT

Galerkin polynomial chaos and collocation methods have been widely adopted for uncertainty quantification purpose. However, when the stiff system is involved, the computational cost can be prohibitive, since stiff numerical integration requires the solution of a nonlinear system of equations at every time step. Applying the Galerkin polynomial chaos to stiff system will cause a computational cost increase from O(n3) to O(S3n3). This paper explores uncertainty quantification techniques for stiff chemical systems using Galerkin polynomial chaos, collocation and collocation least-square approaches. We propose a modification in the implicit time stepping process. The numerical test results show that with the modified approach, the run time of the Galerkin polynomial chaos is reduced. We also explore different methods of choosing collocation points in collocation implementations and propose a collocation least-square approach. We conclude that the collocation least-square for uncertainty quantification is at least as accurate as the Galerkin approach, and is more efficient with a well-chosen set of collocation points.

References

  1. L. G. Crespo and S. P. Kenny. Robust control design for systems with probabilistic uncertainty. Technical report, NASA, LRC, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. V. Damian, A. Sandu, M. Damian, F. Potra, and G. Carmichael. The Kinetic PreProcessor KPP - a software environment for solving chemical kinetics. Comput. Chem. Eng., 26:1567--1579, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. G. Fishman. Monte Carlo: Concepts, Algorithms and Applications, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1996.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. R. G. Ghanem and P. Spanos. Stochastic Finite Elements: A Spectral Approach. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1991. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. J. M. Hammersley. Monte Carlo methods for solving multivariables problems. Ann. New York Acad. Sci., 86:844--874, 1960.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. B. A. P. James. Variance reduction techniques. J. Operations Research Society, 36(6):525, 1985.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. O. M. Knio and O. P. Le Maitre. Uncertainty propogation in cfd using polynomial chaos decomposition. Fluid Dynamics Research, 38:616--640, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. J. S. Liu. Monte Carlo Strategies in Scientific Computing. Springer-Verlag, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. H. N. Najm, M. T. Reagan, O. M. Knio, R. G. Ghanem, and O. P. Le Maitre. Uncertainty quantification on reacting flow modeling. Technical Report 2003-8598, SANDIA, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. A. Sandu and R. Sander. Technical notes: Simulating chemical system in Fortran90 and Matlab with the Kinetic PreProcessor KPP-2.1. Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6:187--195, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. A. Sandu, J. G. Verwer, J. G. Blom, E. J. Spee, G. R. Carmichael, and F. A. Potra. Stiff ODE solvers for atmospheric chemistry problems II: Rosenbrock solvers. Atmos. Environ., 31:3459--3472, 1997.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. S. Smolyak. Quadrature and interpolation formulas for tensor products of certain classes of functions. Soviet Math. Dokl., 4:240--243, 1963.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. N. Wiener. The homogeneous chaos. Amer. J. Math., 60:897--936, 1938.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. D. Xiu and G. Karniadakis. The Wiener-Askey polynomial chaos for stochastic differential equations. SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 24:619--644, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. D. Xiu and G. E. Karniadakis. Modeling uncertainty in steady state diffusion problems via generalized polynomial chaos. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., 191(43):4927--4948, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Numerical study of uncertainty quantification techniques for implicit stiff systems

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      ACM-SE 45: Proceedings of the 45th annual southeast regional conference
      March 2007
      574 pages
      ISBN:9781595936295
      DOI:10.1145/1233341

      Copyright © 2007 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 23 March 2007

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • Article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate134of240submissions,56%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader