Skip to main content

Experimental Comparison of Symplectic and Non-symplectic Model Order Reduction on an Uncertainty Quantification Problem

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Numerical Mathematics and Advanced Applications ENUMATH 2019

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computational Science and Engineering ((LNCSE,volume 139))

  • 1708 Accesses

Abstract

Uncertainty Quantification (UQ) is an important field to quantify the propagation of uncertainties, analyze sensitivities or realize statistical inversion of a mathematical model. Sampling-based estimation techniques evaluate the model for many different parameter samples. For computationally intensive models, this might require long runtimes or even be infeasible. This so-called multi-query problem can be speeded up or even be enabled with surrogate models from model order reduction (MOR) techniques. For accurate and physically consistent MOR, structure-preserving reduction is essential.

We investigate numerically how so-called symplectic model reduction techniques can improve the UQ results for Hamiltonian systems compared to conventional (non-symplectic) approaches. We conclude that the symplectic methods give better results and more robustness with respect to the size of the reduced model.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 299.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 379.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 379.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    https://www.morepas.org/software/rbmatlab/, last accessed: 30. Oct. 2019.

References

  1. Benner, P., Ohlberger, M., Cohen, A., Willcox, K.: Model Reduction and Approximation. Society Industrial Appl. Math., Philadelphia, PA (2017). https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9781611974829

    Book  Google Scholar 

  2. Buchfink, P., Bhatt, A., Haasdonk, B.: Symplectic Model Order Reduction with Non-Orthonormal Bases. Math. Comput. Appl. 24(2) (2019). https://doi.org/10.3390/mca24020043

  3. da Silva, A.C.: Introduction to Symplectic and Hamiltonian Geometry (2007). https://people.math.ethz.ch/~acannas/Papers/impa.pdf. Notes for a Short Course at IMPA.

  4. Galbally, D., Fidkowski, K., Willcox, K., Ghattas, O.: Non-linear model reduction for uncertainty quantification in large-scale inverse problems. Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 81(12), 1581–1608 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.2746

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Hairer, E., Wanner, G., Lubich, C.: Geometric Numerical Integration. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-30666-8

  6. Hesthaven, J.S., Pagliantini, C.: Structure-Preserving Reduced Basis Methods for Hamiltonian Systems with a Nonlinear Poisson Structure (2018). Preprint, Infoscience EPFL sci. publ.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Kajee, Y., Pelteret, J.P.V., Reddy, B.D.: The biomechanics of the human tongue. Int. J. Numer. Methods Biomed. Eng. 29, 492–514 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1002/cnm.2531

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Leimkuhler, B., Reich, S.: Simulating Hamiltonian Dynamics. Cambridge Monogr. Appl. Comput. Math. Cambridge University Press (2005). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511614118

  9. Maboudi Afkham, B., Hesthaven, J.: Structure Preserving Model Reduction of Parametric Hamiltonian Systems. SIAM SISC 39(6), A2616–A2644 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1137/17M1111991

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Peng, L., Mohseni, K.: Symplectic Model Reduction of Hamiltonian Systems. SIAM SISC 38(1), A1–A27 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1137/140978922

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Sirovich, L.: Turbulence the dynamics of coherent structures. Part I: coherent structures. Q. Appl. Math. 45(3), 561–571 (1987)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Sullivan, T.J.: Introduction to Uncertainty Quantification. Springer Int. Publ. (2015)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  13. Xu, H.: An SVD-like matrix decomposition and its applications. Linear Algebr. Appl. 368, 1–24 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-3795(03)00370-7

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Yu, H., He, L., Tar, S.X.D.: Block structure preserving model order reduction. In: BMAS. Proc. IEEE Int. Behav. Model. Simul. Work., pp. 1–6 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1109/BMAS.2005.1518178

Download references

Acknowledgements

We highly acknowledge the funding within the Soft Tissue Project (GRK 2198/1) and by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) under Germany’s Excellence Strategy—EXC-2075—390740016. The valuable input of the anonymous reviewers is acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patrick Buchfink .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Buchfink, P., Haasdonk, B. (2021). Experimental Comparison of Symplectic and Non-symplectic Model Order Reduction on an Uncertainty Quantification Problem. In: Vermolen, F.J., Vuik, C. (eds) Numerical Mathematics and Advanced Applications ENUMATH 2019. Lecture Notes in Computational Science and Engineering, vol 139. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55874-1_19

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics