Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Multifidelity modeling”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2022

Parallel simulated annealing with embedded machine learning and multifidelity models for reactor core design

This paper presents extensions to a penalty-free, parallel simulated annealing (SA) algorithm for multi-constrained combinatorial optimization with the aim of embedding multi-fidelity physics models into the annealing procedure. The method uses a low-fidelity, quickly executing model for rapid design space exploration and a high-fidelity model for detailed constraint resolution and on-the-fly bias correction. Machine learning models updated within the annealing procedure were used to bridge the gap between the multi-fidelity models, which led to accurate rapid exploration and efficient detailed constraint resolution. A software implementation of the new multi-fidelity optimization methods, called ML-PSA, was demonstrated on a continuous multi-fidelity optimization problem and a constrained combinatorial PWR lattice design problem. These problems demonstrate some of the features, parallel performance characteristics, and extensible nature of the multi-fidelity SA methods. This paper shows that the developed software and procedure are a general optimization tool that can be applied to a wide variety of scientific and engineering design optimization applications. (authors)

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Reliability estimation of an advanced nuclear fuel using coupled active learning, multifidelity modeling, and subset simulation

Tristructural isotropic (TRISO)-coated particle fuel is a robust nuclear fuel and determining its reliability is critical for the success of advanced nuclear technologies. However, TRISO failure probabilities are small and the associated computational models are expensive. Here we used coupled active learning, multifidelity modeling, and subset simulation to estimate the failure probabilities of TRISO fuels using several 1D and 2D models. With multifidelity modeling, we replaced expensive high-fidelity (HF) model evaluations with information fusion from two low-fidelity (LF) models. For the 1D TRISO models, we considered three multifidelity modeling strategies: only Kriging, Kriging LF prediction plus Kriging correction, and deep neural network (DNN) LF prediction plus Kriging correction. While the results across these multifidelity modeling strategies compared satisfactorily, strategies employing information fusion from two LF models called the HF model least often. Next, for the 2D TRISO model, we considered two multifidelity modeling strategies: DNN LF prediction plus Kriging correction (data-driven) and 1D TRISO LF prediction plus Kriging correction (physics-based). The physics-based strategy, as expected, consistently required the fewest calls to the HF model. However, the data-driven strategy had a lower overall simulation time since the DNN predictions are instantaneous, and the 1D TRISO model requires a non-negligible simulation time.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Active learning with multifidelity modeling for efficient rare event simulation

Here, while multifidelity modeling provides a cost-effective way to conduct uncertainty quantification with computationally expensive models, much greater efficiency can be achieved by adaptively deciding the number of required high-fidelity (HF) simulations, depending on the type and complexity of the problem and the desired accuracy in the results. We propose a framework for active learning with multifidelity modeling emphasizing the efficient estimation of rare events. Our framework works by fusing a low-fidelity (LF) prediction with an HF-inferred correction, filtering the corrected LF prediction to decide whether to call the high-fidelity model, and for enhanced subsequent accuracy, adapting the correction for the LF prediction after every HF model call. The framework does not make any assumptions as to the LF model type or its correlations with the HF model. In addition, for improved robustness when estimating smaller failure probabilities, we propose using dynamic active learning functions that decide when to call the HF model. We demonstrate our framework using several academic case studies (including some high-dimensional problems) and two finite element model case studies: estimating Navier-Stokes velocities using the Stokes approximation and estimating stresses in a transversely isotropic model subjected to displacements via a coarsely meshed isotropic model. Across these case studies, not only did the proposed framework estimate the failure probabilities accurately, but compared with either Monte Carlo or a standard variance reduction method, it also required only a small fraction of the calls to the HF model.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2023

Efficient Reliability Analysis using Generalized Multifidelity Modeling and Explainable Active Learning

To assess the reliability of critical technologies like nuclear plants and infrastructure systems and improve the robustness of design, engineers have to quantify the uncertainties surrounding the system behavior accurately. However, the complexity of the problem can make standard reliability analysis algorithms prohibitively expensive, primarily due to the high computational cost of estimating the system response at each iteration. This cost can be greatly reduced by using multi-fidelity modeling and machine learning to build a surrogate model to replace the expensive response function. We propose a general and robust method for building surrogates from multiple Low Fidelity (LF) models coupled with machine learning to retain accuracy. Our framework first constructs “Corrected Low Fidelity models” (CLFs) by coupling a High Fidelity (HF) model inferred Gaussian Process correction term with each of the LF models. It then uses the correction terms to assign model probabilities to each of these CLFs in an explainable way before using them to assemble the final surrogate. No assumptions are made about the type of the LF models or their correlation with the HF model. The proposed surrogate modeling framework is used within the subset simulation algorithm (a variance-reduced MCMC-based reliability analysis algorithm) for enhanced efficiency. Additionally, an active learning step is added to the algorithm to adaptively decide when the surrogate is not sufficiently accurate, at which point the HF model is called and used to refine the surrogate. Through a frame buckling example, our method is shown to be highly efficient at reducing the expensive HF model calls while accurately estimating the failure probability.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2024

Analysis of the Challenges in Developing Sample-Based Multi-fidelity Estimators for Non-deterministic Models

Multifidelity (MF) uncertainty quantification (UQ) seeks to leverage and fuse information from a collection of models to achieve greater statistical accuracy with respect to a single-fidelity counterpart, while maintaining an efficient use of computational resources. Despite many recent advancements in MF UQ, several challenges remain and these often limit its practical impact in certain application areas. In this manuscript, we focus on the challenges introduced by nondeterministic models to sampling MF UQ estimators. Nondeterministic models produce different responses for the same inputs, which means their outputs are effectively noisy. MF UQ is complicated by this noise since many state-of-the-art approaches rely on statistics, e.g., the correlation among models, to optimally fuse information and allocate computational resources. Here, we demonstrate how the statistics of the quantities of interest, which impact the design, effectiveness, and use of existing MF UQ techniques, change as functions of the noise. With this in hand, we extend the unifying approximate control variate framework to account for nondeterminism, providing for the first time a rigorous means of comparing the effect of nondeterminism on different multifidelity estimators and analyzing their performance with respect to one another. Numerical examples are presented throughout the manuscript to illustrate and discuss the consequences of the presented theoretical results.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2023

Comparison of multifidelity machine learning models for potential energy surfaces

Multifidelity modeling is a technique for fusing the information from two or more datasets into one model. It is particularly advantageous when one dataset contains few accurate results and the other contains many less accurate results. Within the context of modeling potential energy surfaces, the low-fidelity dataset can be made up of a large number of inexpensive energy computations that provide adequate coverage of the N-dimensional space spanned by the molecular internal coordinates. The high-fidelity dataset can provide fewer but more accurate electronic energies for the molecule in question. Here, we compare the performance of several neural network-based approaches to multifidelity modeling. We show that the four methods (dual, Δ-learning, weight transfer, and Meng–Karniadakis neural networks) outperform a traditional implementation of a neural network, given the same amount of training data. We also show that the Δ-learning approach is the most practical and tends to provide the most accurate model.

Chemistry↗
DOE OSTI2022

Physics-informed CoKriging model of a redox flow battery

Vanadium redox flow batteries (VRFBs) offer the capability to store large amounts of energy cheaply and efficiently, however, there is a need for fast and accurate models of the charge–discharge curve of a VRFB to potentially improve the battery capacity and performance. Here, we develop a multifidelity model for predicting the charge–discharge curve of a VRFB. In the multifidelity model, we use the Physics-informed CoKriging (CoPhIK) machine learning method that is trained on experimental data and constrained by the so-called “zero-dimensional” physics-based model. Here we demonstrate that the model shows good agreement with experimental results and significant improvements over existing zero-dimensional models. We show that the proposed model is robust as it is not sensitive to the input parameters in the zero-dimensional model. We also show that only a small amount of high-fidelity experimental datasets are needed for accurate predictions for the range of considered input parameters, which include current density, flow rate, and initial concentrations.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2025

Covariance-Free Bifidelity Control Variates Importance Sampling for Rare Event Reliability Analysis

Multifidelity modeling has been steadily gaining attention as a tool to address the problem of exorbitant model evaluation costs that makes the estimation of failure probabilities a significant computational challenge for complex real-world problems, particularly when failure is a rare event. To implement multifidelity modeling, estimators that efficiently combine information from multiple models/sources are necessary. In past works, the variance reduction techniques of control variates (CV) and importance sampling (IS) have been leveraged for this task. In this paper, we present the CVIS framework—a creative take on a coupled CV and IS estimator for bifidelity reliability analysis. The framework addresses some of the practical challenges of the CV method by using an estimator for the control variate mean and sidestepping the need to estimate the covariance between the original estimator and the control variate through a clever choice for the tuning constant. Furthermore, the task of selecting an efficient IS distribution is also considered, with a view towards maximally leveraging the bifidelity structure and maintaining expressivity. Additionally, a diagnostic is provided that indicates both the efficiency of the algorithm as well as the relative predictive quality of the models utilized. Finally, the behavior and performance of the framework is explored through analytical and numerical examples.

Markov chain Monte Carlo↗
DOE OSTI2023

Design and Analysis of Multifidelity Finite Element Simulations

Abstract The numerical accuracy of finite element analysis (FEA) depends on the number of finite elements used in the discretization of the space, which can be varied using the mesh size. The larger the number of elements, the more accurate the results are. However, the computational cost increases with the number of elements. In current practice, the experimenter chooses a mesh size that is expected to produce a reasonably accurate result, and for which the computer simulation can be completed in a reasonable amount of time. Improvements to this approach have been proposed using multifidelity modeling by choosing two or three mesh sizes. However, mesh size is a continuous parameter, and therefore, multifidelity simulations can be performed easily by choosing a different value for the mesh size for each of the simulations. In this article, we develop a method to optimally find the mesh sizes for each simulation and satisfy the same time constraints as a single or a double mesh size experiment. A range of different mesh sizes used in the proposed method allows one to fit multifidelity models more reliably and predict the outcome when meshes approach infinitesimally small, which is impossible to achieve in actual simulations. We illustrate our approach using an analytical function and a cantilever beam finite element analysis experiment.

Engineering↗
DOE OSTI2023

General Multifidelity Surrogate Models: Framework and Active-Learning Strategies for Efficient Rare Event Simulation

Estimating the probability of failure for complex real-world systems using high-fidelity computational models is often prohibitively expensive, especially when the probability is small. Exploiting low-fidelity models can make this process more feasible, but merging information from multiple low-fidelity and high-fidelity models poses several challenges. Here, this paper presents a robust multi-fidelity surrogate modeling strategy in which the multi-fidelity surrogate is assembled using an active learning strategy using an on-the-fly model adequacy assessment set within a subset simulation framework for efficient reliability analysis. The multi-fidelity surrogate is assembled by first applying a Gaussian process correction to each low-fidelity model and assigning a model probability based on the model's local predictive accuracy and cost. Three strategies are proposed to fuse these individual surrogates into an overall surrogate model based on model averaging and deterministic/stochastic model selection. The strategies also dictate which model evaluations are necessary. No assumptions are made about the relationships between low-fidelity models, while the high-fidelity model is assumed to be the most accurate and most computationally expensive model. Through two analytical and two numerical case studies, including a case study evaluating the failure probability of Tristructural isotropic-coated (TRISO) nuclear fuels, the algorithm is shown to be highly accurate while drastically reducing the number of high-fidelity model calls (and hence computational cost).

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Multifidelity multiobjective optimization for wake-steering strategies

Abstract. Wake steering is an emerging wind power plant control strategy where upstream turbines are intentionally yawed out of perpendicular alignment with the incoming wind, thereby “steering” wakes away from downstream turbines. However, trade-offs between the gains in power production and fatigue loads induced by this control strategy are the subject of continuing investigation. In this study, we present a multifidelity multiobjective optimization approach for exploring the Pareto front of trade-offs between power and loading during wake steering. A large eddy simulation is used as the high-fidelity model, where an actuator line representation is used to model wind turbine blades and a rainflow-counting algorithm is used to compute damage equivalent loads. A coarser simulation with a simpler loads model is employed as a supplementary low-fidelity model. Multifidelity Bayesian optimization is performed to iteratively learn both a surrogate of the low-fidelity model and an additive discrepancy function, which maps the low-fidelity model to the high-fidelity model. Each optimization uses the expected hypervolume improvement acquisition function, weighted by the total cost of a proposed model evaluation in the multifidelity case. The multifidelity approach is able to capture the logit function shape of the Pareto frontier at a computational cost only 30 % that of the single-fidelity approach. Additionally, we provide physical insights into the vortical structures in the wake that contribute to the Pareto front shape.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Multifidelity Neural Network Formulations for Prediction of Reactive Molecular Potential Energy Surfaces

Here, this paper focuses on the development of multifidelity modeling approaches using neural network surrogates, where training data arising from multiple model forms and resolutions are integrated to predict high-fidelity response quantities of interest at lower cost. We focus on the context of quantum chemistry and the integration of information from multiple levels of theory. Important foundations include the use of symmetry function-based atomic energy vector constructions as feature vectors for representing structures across families of molecules and single-fidelity neural network training capabilities that learn the relationships needed to map feature vectors to potential energy predictions. These foundations are embedded within several multifidelity topologies that decompose the high-fidelity mapping into model-based components, including sequential formulations that admit a general nonlinear mapping across fidelities and discrepancy-based formulations that presume an additive decomposition. Methodologies are first explored and demonstrated on a pair of simple analytical test problems and then deployed for potential energy prediction for C 5 H 5 using B2PLYP-D3/6-311++G(d,p) for high-fidelity simulation data and Hartree–Fock 6-31G for low-fidelity data. For the common case of limited access to high-fidelity data, our computational results demonstrate that multifidelity neural network potential energy surface constructions achieve roughly an order of magnitude improvement, either in terms of test error reduction for equivalent total simulation cost or reduction in total cost for equivalent error.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2023

Multifidelity uncertainty quantification with models based on dissimilar parameters

Multifidelity uncertainty quantification (MF UQ) sampling approaches have been shown to significantly reduce the variance of statistical estimators while preserving the bias of the highest-fidelity model, provided that the low-fidelity models are well correlated. However, maintaining a high level of correlation can be challenging, especially when models depend on different input uncertain parameters, which drastically reduces the correlation. Existing MF UQ approaches do not adequately address this issue. In this work, we propose a new sampling strategy that exploits a shared space to improve the correlation among models with dissimilar parameterization. We achieve this by transforming the original coordinates onto an auxiliary manifold using the adaptive basis (AB) method (Tipireddy and Ghanem, 2014). The AB method has two main benefits: (1) it provides an effective tool to identify the low-dimensional manifold on which each model can be represented, and (2) it enables easy transformation of polynomial chaos representations from high- to low-dimensional spaces. This latter feature is used to identify a shared manifold among models without requiring additional evaluations. Here we present two algorithmic flavors of the new estimator to cover different analysis scenarios, including those with legacy and non-legacy high-fidelity (HF) data. We provide numerical results for analytical examples, a direct field acoustic test, and a finite element model of a nuclear fuel assembly. For all examples, we compare the proposed strategy against both single-fidelity and MF estimators based on the original model parameterization.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2022

Accelerated statistical failure analysis of multifidelity TRISO fuel models

Statistical nuclear fuel failure analysis is critical for the design and development of advanced reactor technologies. Although Monte Carlo Sampling (MCS) is a standard method of statistical failure analysis for fuels, the low failure probabilities of some advanced fuel forms and the correspondingly large number of required model evaluations limit its application to low-fidelity (e.g., 1-D) fuel models. In this paper, we present four other statistical methods for fuel failure analysis in Bison, considering tri-structural isotropic (TRISO)-coated particle fuel as a case study. The statistical methods considered are Latin hypercube sampling (LHS), adaptive importance sampling (AIS), subset simulation (SS), and the Weibull theory. Using these methods, we analyzed both 1-D and 2-D representations of TRISO models to compute failure probabilities and the distributions of fuel properties that result in failures. The results of these methods compare well across all TRISO models considered. Overall, SS and the Weibull theory were deemed the most efficient, and can be applied to both 1-D and 2-D TRISO models to compute failure probabilities. Moreover, since SS also characterizes the distribution of parameters that cause TRISO failures, and can consider failure modes not described by the Weibull criterion, it may be preferred over the other methods. Finally, a discussion on the efficacy of different statistical methods of assessing nuclear fuel safety is provided.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗