Paper detail

Polynomial meta-models with canonical low-rank approximations: numerical insights and comparison to sparse polynomial chaos expansions

The growing need for uncertainty analysis of complex computational models has led to an expanding use of meta-models across engineering and sciences. The efficiency of meta-modeling techniques relies on their ability to provide statistically-equivalent analytical representations based on relatively few evaluations of the original model. Polynomial chaos expansions (PCE) have proven a powerful tool for developing meta-models in a wide range of applications; the key idea thereof is to expand the model response onto a basis made of multivariate polynomials obtained as tensor products of appropriate univariate polynomials. The classical PCE approach nevertheless faces the "curse of dimensionality", namely the exponential increase of the basis size with increasing input dimension. To address this limitation, the sparse PCE technique has been proposed, in which the expansion is carried out on only a few relevant basis terms that are automatically selected by a suitable algorithm. An alternative for developing meta-models with polynomial functions in high-dimensional problems is offered by the newly emerged low-rank approximations (LRA) approach. By exploiting the tensor-product structure of the multivariate basis, LRA can provide polynomial representations in highly compressed formats. Through extensive numerical investigations, we herein first shed light on issues relating to the construction of canonical LRA with a particular greedy algorithm involving a sequential updating of the polynomial coefficients along separate dimensions. Canonical LRA exhibit smaller errors than sparse PCE in cases when the number of available model evaluations is small with respect to the input dimension. By introducing the conditional generalization error, we further demonstrate that canonical LRA tend to outperform sparse PCE in the prediction of extreme model responses.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors2 topics

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 map preview

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.