Material Model Parameter Identification via Markov Chain Monte Carlo Christian Knipprath 1 Alexandros A. Skordos 2 www.bris.ac.uk/composites 1 – ACCIS,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Introduction to Monte Carlo Markov chain (MCMC) methods
Advertisements

CompTest 2003 : ENSAM-Châlons en Champagne, January 2003 DIRECT IDENTIFICATION OF THE DAMAGED BEHAVIOUR OF COMPOSITE MATERIALS USING THE VIRTUAL.
Markov Chain Monte Carlo Convergence Diagnostics: A Comparative Review By Mary Kathryn Cowles and Bradley P. Carlin Presented by Yuting Qi 12/01/2006.
Bayesian Estimation in MARK
Efficient Cosmological Parameter Estimation with Hamiltonian Monte Carlo Amir Hajian Amir Hajian Cosmo06 – September 25, 2006 Astro-ph/
By Addison Euhus, Guidance by Edward Phillips An Introduction To Uncertainty Quantification.
Ch 11. Sampling Models Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning, C. M. Bishop, Summarized by I.-H. Lee Biointelligence Laboratory, Seoul National.
Gibbs Sampling Qianji Zheng Oct. 5th, 2010.
High strain rate characterization of unidirectional carbon-epoxy IM in transverse compression and in-plane shear via digital image correlation Pedro.
Bayesian Methods with Monte Carlo Markov Chains III
CHAPTER 16 MARKOV CHAIN MONTE CARLO
Bayesian Reasoning: Markov Chain Monte Carlo
Bayesian statistics – MCMC techniques
Suggested readings Historical notes Markov chains MCMC details
BAYESIAN INFERENCE Sampling techniques
On Systems with Limited Communication PhD Thesis Defense Jian Zou May 6, 2004.
Computational statistics 2009 Random walk. Computational statistics 2009 Random walk with absorbing barrier.
Today Introduction to MCMC Particle filters and MCMC
Using ranking and DCE data to value health states on the QALY scale using conventional and Bayesian methods Theresa Cain.
The Monte Carlo Method: an Introduction Detlev Reiter Research Centre Jülich (FZJ) D Jülich
Lecture II-2: Probability Review
Robin McDougall, Ed Waller and Scott Nokleby Faculties of Engineering & Applied Science and Energy Systems & Nuclear Science 1.
Bayes Factor Based on Han and Carlin (2001, JASA).
Queensland University of Technology CRICOS No J Towards Likelihood Free Inference Tony Pettitt QUT, Brisbane Joint work with.
Bayesian parameter estimation in cosmology with Population Monte Carlo By Darell Moodley (UKZN) Supervisor: Prof. K Moodley (UKZN) SKA Postgraduate conference,
Introduction to MCMC and BUGS. Computational problems More parameters -> even more parameter combinations Exact computation and grid approximation become.
Probabilistic Mechanism Analysis. Outline Uncertainty in mechanisms Why consider uncertainty Basics of uncertainty Probabilistic mechanism analysis Examples.
Exam I review Understanding the meaning of the terminology we use. Quick calculations that indicate understanding of the basis of methods. Many of the.
Module 1: Statistical Issues in Micro simulation Paul Sousa.
Stochastic Monte Carlo methods for non-linear statistical inverse problems Benjamin R. Herman Department of Electrical Engineering City College of New.
1 Gil McVean Tuesday 24 th February 2009 Markov Chain Monte Carlo.
Statistical Sampling-Based Parametric Analysis of Power Grids Dr. Peng Li Presented by Xueqian Zhao EE5970 Seminar.
Analysis of Exchange Ratio for Exchange Monte Carlo Method Kenji Nagata, Sumio Watanabe Tokyo Institute of Technology Japan.
Bayesian Inversion of Stokes Profiles A.Asensio Ramos (IAC) M. J. Martínez González (LERMA) J. A. Rubiño Martín (IAC) Beaulieu Workshop ( Beaulieu sur.
Binary Stochastic Fields: Theory and Application to Modeling of Two-Phase Random Media Steve Koutsourelakis University of Innsbruck George Deodatis Columbia.
Bayesian MCMC QTL mapping in outbred mice Andrew Morris, Binnaz Yalcin, Jan Fullerton, Angela Meesaq, Rob Deacon, Nick Rawlins and Jonathan Flint Wellcome.
Simulation techniques Summary of the methods we used so far Other methods –Rejection sampling –Importance sampling Very good slides from Dr. Joo-Ho Choi.
Example: Bioassay experiment Problem statement –Observations: At each level of dose, 5 animals are tested, and number of death are observed.
Bayesian Reasoning: Tempering & Sampling A/Prof Geraint F. Lewis Rm 560:
Improved Cross Entropy Method For Estimation Presented by: Alex & Yanna.
G. Cowan RHUL Physics Bayesian Higgs combination page 1 Bayesian Higgs combination based on event counts (follow-up from 11 May 07) ATLAS Statistics Forum.
Tracking Multiple Cells By Correspondence Resolution In A Sequential Bayesian Framework Nilanjan Ray Gang Dong Scott T. Acton C.L. Brown Department of.
Bayesian Hierarchical Modeling for Longitudinal Frequency Data Joseph Jordan Advisor: John C. Kern II Department of Mathematics and Computer Science Duquesne.
Machine Design Under Uncertainty. Outline Uncertainty in mechanical components Why consider uncertainty Basics of uncertainty Uncertainty analysis for.
Application of the MCMC Method for the Calibration of DSMC Parameters James S. Strand and David B. Goldstein The University of Texas at Austin Sponsored.
Markov Chain Monte Carlo for LDA C. Andrieu, N. D. Freitas, and A. Doucet, An Introduction to MCMC for Machine Learning, R. M. Neal, Probabilistic.
Lecture #9: Introduction to Markov Chain Monte Carlo, part 3
Reducing MCMC Computational Cost With a Two Layered Bayesian Approach
1 Chapter 8: Model Inference and Averaging Presented by Hui Fang.
Introduction to Sampling Methods Qi Zhao Oct.27,2004.
The Unscented Particle Filter 2000/09/29 이 시은. Introduction Filtering –estimate the states(parameters or hidden variable) as a set of observations becomes.
CS Statistical Machine learning Lecture 25 Yuan (Alan) Qi Purdue CS Nov
Bayesian Modelling Harry R. Erwin, PhD School of Computing and Technology University of Sunderland.
Gil McVean, Department of Statistics Thursday February 12 th 2009 Monte Carlo simulation.
Introduction: Metropolis-Hasting Sampler Purpose--To draw samples from a probability distribution There are three steps 1Propose a move from x to y 2Accept.
Kevin Stevenson AST 4762/5765. What is MCMC?  Random sampling algorithm  Estimates model parameters and their uncertainty  Only samples regions of.
SIR method continued. SIR: sample-importance resampling Find maximum likelihood (best likelihood × prior), Y Randomly sample pairs of r and N 1973 For.
Hierarchical Models. Conceptual: What are we talking about? – What makes a statistical model hierarchical? – How does that fit into population analysis?
The Monte Carlo Method/ Markov Chains/ Metropolitan Algorithm from sec in “Adaptive Cooperative Systems” -summarized by Jinsan Yang.
Generalization Performance of Exchange Monte Carlo Method for Normal Mixture Models Kenji Nagata, Sumio Watanabe Tokyo Institute of Technology.
Lead discusser: Yu Wang
MCMC Output & Metropolis-Hastings Algorithm Part I
Optimization of Monte Carlo Integration
Advanced Statistical Computing Fall 2016
Bayesian inference Presented by Amir Hadadi
Markov chain monte carlo
Remember that our objective is for some density f(y|) for observations where y and  are vectors of data and parameters,  being sampled from a prior.
Predictive distributions
Multidimensional Integration Part I
Econometrics Chengyuan Yin School of Mathematics.
Presentation transcript:

Material Model Parameter Identification via Markov Chain Monte Carlo Christian Knipprath 1 Alexandros A. Skordos – ACCIS, University of Bristol, UK 2 – Composites Centre, Cranfield University, UK

2/19 Roadmap Introduction –Origin of the MCMC method –Motivation Numerical Implementation –Outline of the algorithm used –Application to a simple problem Application to material models for composites –Description of constitutive model –Conventional parameter identification method –Employment of MCMC algorithm –Comparison of conventional to MCMC Conclusions 5 th CompTest conference February 2011

3/19 Introduction Origins of Markov Chain Monte Carlo –First presented in 1953 (Metropolis algorithm) by physicists from the Los Alamos National Laboratory to compute the potential fields of molecules in liquids –Generalisation by Hastings lead to the Metropolis-Hasting. –Conceptually able of solving inverse problems. Such problems are often subject to ill-posedness and benefit from the regularising properties of MCMC –MCMC was a well established method in the context of statistical physics before the method was applied to other fields in the 1990s. Initially in econometric and financial modelling. 5 th CompTest conference February 2011

4/19 Introduction Motivation –Treatment of the material model as an inverse problem. –Certainty of the parameters as an answer of the model response with relation to experimental data sets –Uncertainty quantification –Simultaneous analysis of large data sets 5 th CompTest conference February 2011

5/19 Random walk Metropolis-Hastings algorithm –Iterative algorithm –Employment of Bayes’ theorem of conditional probability to compute the joint posterior used in the acceptance probability Numerical Implementation posterior likelihood prior marginal 5 th CompTest conference February 2011

6/19 Numerical Implementation Joint likelihood distribution –Addresses the certainty of an experimental data point in respect to the theoretical value –All data points are considered Joint prior distribution –Addresses the certainty of a proposed parameter considering its characteristic distribution –Appropriate distribution to describe the parameter best is often difficult to identify, hence normal distribution is a “generic” choice –Note: Traditional techniques imply of uniform prior Log-Normal distribution Normal distribution 5 th CompTest conference February 2011

7/19 Numerical Implementation Application to a simple problem –Hooke’s law –Setup: starting value 6 GPa 1000 iterations Tuning to reach acceptance ratio of 48% Burn-in range: 200 iterations 5 th CompTest conference February 2011

8/19 Numerical Implementation Use of auto-correlation function (ACF) to determine thinning step size for sequence The resulting sample vector contains uncorrelated values gathered from the stationary sequence 5 th CompTest conference February 2011

9/19 Application Ladevèze model for in-plane damage –Thermodynamic framework model –Constitutive law used effective properties –Damage evolution is determined using the energy dissipation threshold values –Inelastic strains are computed via a Hill-type yield criterion 5 th CompTest conference February 2011

10/19 Application Cohesive law for out-of-plane behaviour –Bilinear law –Definition of stresses and energy limits For the use in MCMC both material models were implemented in an explicit manner Parameter set comprises 27 parameters (no rate effects) 5 th CompTest conference February 2011

11/19 Application Conventional parameter identification method –Experiments required for in-plane parameter identification [0 º ] 8 in tension and compression [±45 º ] 2s, [+45 º ] 2s, [±67.5 º ] 2s under cyclic tensile loading for damage behaviour –Mode I & II delamination for cohesive interfaces –Information is extracted from experimental data (shown for shear) 5 th CompTest conference February 2011

12/19 Application 5 th CompTest conference February 2011 Employment of MCMC algorithm –Setup: Starting vector obtained from conventional method on single experiment 4,000,000 iterations Tuning to reach acceptance probability of around 25% Burn-in range: 1,000,000 iterations 4 chains in parallel Application of 3 convergence assessment methods

13/19 Application Probability density plots –Elastic tensile modulus in fibre directions shows a single mode answer for the PDF –Additional modes were found for m and R 0 5 th CompTest conference February 2011

14/19 Application Application of Parallel Tempering (PT) –Introduction of temperature parameter with –Tempering parameter is used for numerical purposes: –Higher values for T flatten the target distribution and allow the acceptance of a broader range of proposed parameters. These distributions are less likely to be trapped in local modes –Parameter sets are swapped between chains based on a computed swapping probability –Only the neutral (=1) can be used for the analysis 5 th CompTest conference February 2011

15/19 Application Comparison for a single experiment –For transverse response the conventional method indicated premature failure –In the shear response stresses are over-predicted by the conventional method 5 th CompTest conference February 2011

16/19 Comparison Comparison for a single experiment –Compression  - non-linear behaviour due to fibre buckling –Conventional method leads to a value of –MCMC method leads yields a value of 6.37± th CompTest conference February 2011

17/19 Conclusion Parameters were identified with additional information provided by probability density functions This type of information can be the basis of stochastic simulations of the mechanical and damage response Although mean/median values are used in FE models the PDFs provide further information on parameters Further development will address –Tuning procedure Automated tuning algorithm –Overall runtime Parallelisation 5 th CompTest conference February 2011

18/19 Financial support from the CEC under the PreCarBi project (FP ) is gratefully acknowledged Acknowledgement 5 th CompTest conference February 2011

19/19 Thank you for your attention. 5 th CompTest conference February 2011