doi:10.1016/j.compstruc.2004.03.008
Copyright © 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Comparison between Karhunen–Loeve and wavelet expansions for simulation of Gaussian processes
Department of Civil Engineering, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117576, Singapore
Accepted 5 March 2004.
Available online 9 April 2004.
References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must
purchase this article.
Abstract
The series representation consisting of eigenfunctions as the orthogonal basis is called the Karhunen–Loeve expansion. This paper demonstrates that the determination of eigensolutions using a wavelet-Galerkin scheme for Karhunen–Loeve expansion is computationally equivalent to using wavelet directly for stochastic expansion and simulating the correlated random coefficients using eigen decomposition. An alternate but longer wavelet expansion using Cholesky decomposition is shown to be of comparable accuracy. When simulation time dominates over initial overhead incurred by eigen or Cholesky decomposition, it is potentially more efficient to use a shorter truncated K–L expansion that only retains the most significant eigenmodes.
Author Keywords: Wavelets; Karhunen–Loeve; Eigen decomposition; Cholesky factorisation; Gaussian process
Fig. 1. Relative eigenvalue errors from simulation using wavelet-based K–L expansion with M=N: (a) 10,000 realisations and (b) 100,000 realisations (closed symbol: simulation, open symbol: theory).
Fig. 2. Relative eigenvalue errors from simulation (after orthogonalization) using wavelet-based K–L expansion with M=N for 10,000 realisations (closed symbol: simulation, open symbol: theory).
Fig. 3. Eigenvalues of exponential covariance function evaluated using N=512 wavelet basis functions for various normalized length of the process (a/b).
Table 1. Statistical correlations in the simulation of standard Gaussian variates ξk(θ) using pseudo-random number generator ran1 with Box–Muller transform

Note: rmax=maximum off-diagonal entry in correlation matrix R, rcrit=critical value for rejecting null hypothesis of zero correlation at 5% level of significance.
Table 2. Comparison of runtime (s) required for simulating 10,000 realisations using K–L expansion (Eq. (15)) and Cholesky expansion (Eq. (17)) with M=N

Table 3. Comparison of runtime (s) for generating different normalized length of processes using the truncated K–L expansion with M
N, K–L expansion with M=N and Cholesky expansion with M=N (N=512 for all cases)
