Paper detail

Bias in the representative volume element method: periodize the ensemble instead of its realizations

We study the Representative Volume Element (RVE) method, which is a method to approximately infer the effective behavior $a_{\text{hom}}$ of a stationary random medium. The latter is described by a coefficient field $a(x)$ generated from a given ensemble $\langle\cdot\rangle$ and the corresponding linear elliptic operator $-\nabla\cdot a\nabla$. In line with the theory of homogenization, the method proceeds by computing $d = 3$ correctors (d denoting the space dimension).To be numerically tractable, this computation has to be done on a finite domain: the so-called "representative" volume element, i. e. a large box with, say, periodic boundary conditions. The main message of this article is: Periodize the ensemble instead of its realizations. By this we mean that it is better to sample from a suitably periodized ensemble than to periodically extend the restriction of a realization $a(x)$ from the whole-space ensemble $\langle\cdot\rangle$. We make this point by investigating the bias (or systematic error), i. e. the difference between $a_{\text{hom}}$ and the expected value of the RVE method, in terms of its scaling w. r. t. the lateral size $L$ of the box. In case of periodizing $a(x)$, we heuristically argue that this error is generically $O(L^{-1})$. In case of a suitable periodization of $\langle\cdot\rangle$, we rigorously show that it is $O(L^{-d})$. In fact, we give a characterization of the leading-order error term for both strategies, and argue that even in the isotropic case it is generically non-degenerate. We carry out the rigorous analysis in the convenient setting of ensembles $\langle\cdot\rangle$ of Gaussian type with integrable covariance, which allow for a straightforward periodization and which make the Price theorem and the Malliavin calculus available for optimal stochastic estimates of correctors.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.