Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method"

Lilian Sparks
5 years ago
Views:

Stefan Ulbrich2, Stefan Volkwein1 1 Universita t

Statistik Technischen Universita t Darmstadt,

December 12, 2013 ModRed 2013, Magdeburg Laura

1 Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method Laura Iapichino1, Stefan Ulbrich2, Stefan Volkwein1 1 Universita t 2 Konstanz - Fachbereich Mathematik und Statistik Technischen Universita t Darmstadt, Fachbereich Mathematik. December 12, 2013 ModRed 2013, Magdeburg Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 1 / 21

2 Outline Outline Short motivation on model order reduction Brief overview on the Reduced basis method Multiobjective Optimization Numerical results Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 2 / 21

3 Outline Outline Short motivation on model order reduction Brief overview on the Reduced basis method Multiobjective Optimization Pareto optimal solutions computed with the Reduced Basis method Sensitivity analysis for an efficient solution of the problem Numerical results Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 2 / 21

4 Reduced Basis Method Motivation ν u + p = 0 u = 0 u = 0 ν u pn = n n on ν u n pn = 0 in Ω in Ω on Γ D Γ in on Γ out Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 3 / 21

5 Reduced Basis Method Motivation µ p u(µ) + p(µ) = 0 in Ωµ G u(µ) = 0 in Ωµ G u(µ) = 0 on Γ Dµ G u(µ) µ p n p(µ)n = n on Γ inµ G u(µ) µ p n p(µ)n = 0 on Γ outµ G Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 3 / 21

Reduced Basis Method Motivation µ p u(µ) + p(µ) = 0 in Ωµ G u(µ) = 0 in Ωµ G u(µ) = 0 on Γ Dµ G u(µ) µ p n p(µ)n = n on Γ inµ G u(µ) µ p n p(µ)n = 0 on Γ outµ G PDEs are very expensive to solve when

Finite Element method) are not suitable in a many query context, where the solution has to be computed for many different values of the parameters (Optimization problem, Multiobjective optimization).

6 Reduced Basis Method Motivation µ p u(µ) + p(µ) = 0 in Ωµ G u(µ) = 0 in Ωµ G u(µ) = 0 on Γ Dµ G u(µ) µ p n p(µ)n = n on Γ inµ G u(µ) µ p n p(µ)n = 0 on Γ outµ G PDEs are very expensive to solve when solutions need to capture fine physical details (velocity boundary layers, wall shear stresses, vorticity layers, etc.) Classical numerical techniques (e.g. Finite Element method) are not suitable in a many query context, where the solution has to be computed for many different values of the parameters (Optimization problem, Multiobjective optimization). Reduced order modeling permits to achieve the accuracy and reliability of a high fidelity approximation by drastically decreasing the problem complexity and computational time. Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 3 / 21

7 Reduced Basis Method The Reduced Basis Method Offline Stage FEM solutions for a representative set of parameter values µ 1,..., µ N with N N... u N 1 u N 2... u N N The parameter values can be selected by the Greedy algorithm or a optimization greedy algorithm (Volkwein et al.,2012). Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 4 / 21

.. u N N The parameter values can be selected by the Greedy algorithm or a

Online Stage For each new parameter vector µ the RB solution is a weighted

8 Reduced Basis Method The Reduced Basis Method Offline Stage FEM solutions for a representative set of parameter values µ 1,..., µ N with N N... u N 1 u N 2... u N N The parameter values can be selected by the Greedy algorithm or a optimization greedy algorithm (Volkwein et al.,2012). Online Stage For each new parameter vector µ the RB solution is a weighted combinations of the precomputed solutions (Galerkin projection) Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 4 / 21

9 Reduced Basis Method RB method: basic ingredients Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 5 / 21

10 Reduced Basis Method RB method: basic ingredients Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 5 / 21

11 Reduced Basis Method RB method: basic ingredients Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 5 / 21

12 Reduced Basis Method RB method: basic ingredients Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 5 / 21

13 Multiobjective optimization Often in real applications the optimization issue is described by introducing several objective functions which compete with each other. Optimal solution needs to be taken in the presence of trade-offs between two or more conflicting objectives. Does not exist a single solution that simultaneously optimizes each objective, but there exists a (possibly infinite) number of Pareto optimal solutions. The computation of efficient points can be very expensive in particular, if the constraints are given by partial differential equations. Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 6 / 21

14 PDE-Constrained multiobjective optimization V and U real, separable Hilbert spaces and X = V U, we introduce the vector-valued objective J : V U R 3 by J 1 (x) = 1 2 C y w 1 2 W 1 J 2 (x) = 1 2 Dy w 2 2 W 2, J 3 (x) = γ 2 u 2 where x = (y,u) X, γ 0 W 1, W 2 are Hilbert spaces, w 1 W 1, w 2 W 2 and C, D are linear, bounded from V to W 1 respectively V to W 2. Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 7 / 21

15 PDE-Constrained multiobjective optimization V and U real, separable Hilbert spaces and X = V U, we introduce the vector-valued objective J : V U R 3 by J 1 (x) = 1 2 C y w 1 2 W 1 J 2 (x) = 1 2 Dy w 2 2 W 2, J 3 (x) = γ 2 u 2 where x = (y,u) X, γ 0 W 1, W 2 are Hilbert spaces, w 1 W 1, w 2 W 2 and C, D are linear, bounded from V to W 1 respectively V to W 2. Multiobjective problem to minimize all objectives J k,k = 1,2,3 at the same time, such that (y,u) V U solves the linear variational problem a(y,ϕ) = f + Bu,ϕ V,V ϕ V, (1) where, V,V stands for the dual pairing between V and its dual space V and B is a continuous, linear operator and a(, ) a coercive bilinear form. Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 7 / 21

16 Multiobjective optimization - Pareto optimal points First-order necessary conditions for Pareto optimality Suppose that ū U is Pareto optimal, Ĵi(u) = J i (y,u). There exists a parameter µ = ( µ 1, µ 2, µ 3 ) R 3 with µ i 0 and 3 i=1 µ i = 1 satisfying We define the µ-dependent, scalar-valued objective 3 µ i Ĵ i (ū) = 0. (2) i=1 3 Ĵ(u; µ) = µ i Ĵ i (u). i=1 Then, (2) are the necessary optimality conditions for a local solution ū to minĵ(u; µ) s.t. (y,u) U Y solves (1). (ˆP µ ) In the weighting method Pareto optimal points are computed by solving (ˆP µ ).. Feasible extensions to control constrained and non-linear multiobjective problems. Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 8 / 21

17 Multiobjective optimization solved with the RB method - C. Hillermeier. Nonlinear Multiobjective Optimization. A Generalized Homotopy Approach. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, F. Negri, G. Rozza, A. Manzoni, and A. Quateroni. Reduced basis method for parametrized elliptic optimal control problems, Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 9 / 21

18 Multiobjective optimization solved with the RB method Parametric saddle point formulation solvable by the reduced basis method - C. Hillermeier. Nonlinear Multiobjective Optimization. A Generalized Homotopy Approach. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, F. Negri, G. Rozza, A. Manzoni, and A. Quateroni. Reduced basis method for parametrized elliptic optimal control problems, Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 9 / 21

Multiobjective optimization solved with the RB method Parametric saddle point formulation solvable by the reduced basis method - C. Hillermeier. Nonlinear Multiobjective Optimization.

19 Multiobjective optimization solved with the RB method Parametric saddle point formulation solvable by the reduced basis method - C. Hillermeier. Nonlinear Multiobjective Optimization. A Generalized Homotopy Approach. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, F. Negri, G. Rozza, A. Manzoni, and A. Quateroni. Reduced basis method for parametrized elliptic optimal control problems, Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 9 / 21

20 Multiobjective optimization solved with the RB method Ĵ(u; µ) = 3 i=1 µ iĵi(u) = µ 1 2 m 1(y y d,y y d ) + µ 2 2 m 2(y,y) + (1 µ 1 µ 2 ) 2 m 3 (u,u). minĵ(u; µ) s.t. u U solves a(y,ϕ) = f + C u,ϕ Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 10 / 21

21 Multiobjective optimization solved with the RB method Ĵ(u; µ) = 3 i=1 µ iĵi(u) = µ 1 2 m 1(y y d,y y d ) + µ 2 2 m 2(y,y) + (1 µ 1 µ 2 ) 2 m 3 (u,u). minĵ(u; µ) s.t. u U solves a(y,ϕ; µ) = fµ + Cµ u,ϕ (can be µpde) Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 10 / 21

22 Multiobjective optimization solved with the RB method Ĵ(u; µ) = 3 i=1 µ iĵi(u) = µ 1 2 m 1(y y d,y y d ) + µ 2 2 m 2(y,y) + (1 µ 1 µ 2 ) 2 m 3 (u,u). minĵ(u; µ) s.t. u U solves a(y,ϕ; µ) = fµ + Cµ u,ϕ (can be µpde) Saddle-point formulation (Brezzi theorem for existence and uniqueness). A (x(µ),w; µ) + B(w,p(µ); µ) = F (µ),w, w X B(x(µ),ϕ; µ) = f,ϕ, ϕ Q (3) p(µ) is the Lagrange multiplier associated to the constrain. L (x,p; µ) = J(x, µ) + B(x,p; µ) f,p. Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 10 / 21

23 Multiobjective optimization solved with the RB method Ĵ(u; µ) = 3 i=1 µ iĵi(u) = µ 1 2 m 1(y y d,y y d ) + µ 2 2 m 2(y,y) + (1 µ 1 µ 2 ) 2 m 3 (u,u). minĵ(u; µ) s.t. u U solves a(y,ϕ; µ) = fµ + Cµ u,ϕ (can be µpde) Saddle-point formulation (Brezzi theorem for existence and uniqueness). A (x(µ),w; µ) + B(w,p(µ); µ) = F (µ),w, w X B(x(µ),ϕ; µ) = f,ϕ, ϕ Q (3) p(µ) is the Lagrange multiplier associated to the constrain. L (x,p; µ) = J(x, µ) + B(x,p; µ) f,p. Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 10 / 21

24 Multiobjective optimization solved with the RB method RB spaces Snapshots: {y N (µ n ),n = 1,...,N}, {u N (µ n ),n = 1,...,N},{p N (µ n ),n = 1,...,N} State and adjoint space: Z N = span{y N (µ n ),p N (µ n ),n = 1,...,N}. Control space: U N = span{u N (µ n ),n = 1,...,N} Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 11 / 21

25 Multiobjective optimization solved with the RB method RB spaces Snapshots: {y N (µ n ),n = 1,...,N}, {u N (µ n ),n = 1,...,N},{p N (µ n ),n = 1,...,N} State and adjoint space: Z N = span{y N (µ n ),p N (µ n ),n = 1,...,N}. Control space: U N = span{u N (µ n ),n = 1,...,N} A posteriori error estimates A posteriori error bound for the solution: ( x N (µ) x N (µ) 2 X + pn (µ) p N (µ) 2 Q )1/2 N (µ) = r(, µ) X β N (µ) A posteriori error bound for the cost functional: J(y N (µ),u N (µ); µ) J(y N (µ),u N (µ); µ) J N (µ) = 1 r(, µ) 2 X 2 β N (µ) r(, µ) X dual norm of the residual β N (µ) Babuska inf-sup constant (or a proper lower bound). Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 11 / 21

26 Sensitivity analysis Let consider ˆµ as first parameter to compute the first Pareto point, we are interested in choosing the next µ such that the weights µ 1 and µ 2 lead to significant changes of the cost functional Ĵ(u; ˆµ) = ˆµ 1 2 C ŷ w 1 2 W 1 + ˆµ 2 2 Dŷ w 2 2 W 2 + (1 ˆµ 1 ˆµ 2 ) γ 2 û 2. Taylor expansion of the reduced objective with respect to changes in µ 1 and µ 2 is: J(u; µ) = Ĵ(û; ˆµ) + Ĵ µ 1 (û; ˆµ)(µ 1 ˆµ 1 ) + Ĵ µ 2 (û; ˆµ)(µ 2 ˆµ 2 ) Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 12 / 21

27 Sensitivity analysis Let consider ˆµ as first parameter to compute the first Pareto point, we are interested in choosing the next µ such that the weights µ 1 and µ 2 lead to significant changes of the cost functional Ĵ(u; ˆµ) = ˆµ 1 2 C ŷ w 1 2 W 1 + ˆµ 2 2 Dŷ w 2 2 W 2 + (1 ˆµ 1 ˆµ 2 ) γ 2 û 2. Taylor expansion of the reduced objective with respect to changes in µ 1 and µ 2 is: J(u; µ) = Ĵ(û; ˆµ) + Ĵ µ 1 (û; ˆµ)(µ 1 ˆµ 1 ) + Ĵ µ 2 (û; ˆµ)(µ 2 ˆµ 2 ) Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 12 / 21

Sensitivity analysis Let consider ˆµ as first parameter to compute the first Pareto point, we are interested in choosing the next µ such that the weights µ 1 and µ 2 lead to significant changes of

28 Sensitivity analysis Let consider ˆµ as first parameter to compute the first Pareto point, we are interested in choosing the next µ such that the weights µ 1 and µ 2 lead to significant changes of the cost functional Ĵ(u; ˆµ) = ˆµ 1 2 C ŷ w 1 2 W 1 + ˆµ 2 2 Dŷ w 2 2 W 2 + (1 ˆµ 1 ˆµ 2 ) γ 2 û 2. Taylor expansion of the reduced objective with respect to changes in µ 1 and µ 2 is: J(u; µ) = Ĵ(û; ˆµ) + Ĵ µ 1 (û; ˆµ)(µ 1 ˆµ 1 ) + Ĵ µ 2 (û; ˆµ)(µ 2 ˆµ 2 ) Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 12 / 21

Sensitivity analysis RB offline step for the RB approximation of the saddle point problem; RB online step for defining the RB optimal solutions corresponding to initial parameter guesses; sensitivity

29 Sensitivity analysis RB offline step for the RB approximation of the saddle point problem; RB online step for defining the RB optimal solutions corresponding to initial parameter guesses; sensitivity analysis for defining a suitable parameter set X s that leads to significant variations of the cost functional; RB Pareto optimal solutions for the parameter set X s. The sensitivity analysis allows to drastically reduce the number of online RB computations needed to recover a suitable distribution of the Pareto optimal solutions. Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 13 / 21

30 Numerical results We consider the domain Ω given by a rectangle separated in two subdomains Ω 1 and Ω 2. J 1 (y) = 1 2 y y d 2 L 2 (Ω), J 2(y) = 1 2 y 2 L 2 (Ω), J 3(u) = α 2 u 2 U where y d = 1 in Ω 1 and y d = 0.6 in Ω 2. The state function y Y = H0 1 (Ω) solves the following Laplace problem: y = u in Ω, y = 1 on Γ D = Ω, (4) where u L 2 (Ω) is the control function. In order to apply the Pareto optimal theory we introduce the following cost functional: Ĵ(y(µ),u(µ), µ) = µ 1 J 1 (y(µ)) + µ 2 J 2 (y(µ)) + (1 µ 1 µ 2 )J 3 (u(µ)), and the parametrized optimal control problem: minĵ(y(µ),u(µ), µ) s. t. (y(µ),u(µ)) Y U solves (4). y,u Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 14 / 21

Numerical results The numerical approximation of the reduced basis functions (state, control and adjoint variables) is computed by using P 1 finite elements. N = 11441.

31 Numerical results The numerical approximation of the reduced basis functions (state, control and adjoint variables) is computed by using P 1 finite elements. N = µ 1 [0,1] and µ 2 [0,1 µ 1 ]. Figure: Representative solution for µ = (0.11,0.83). Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 15 / 21

32 Numerical results The numerical approximation of the reduced basis functions (state, control and adjoint variables) is computed by using P 1 finite elements. N = µ 1 [0,1] and µ 2 [0,1 µ 1 ]. Figure: Representative solution for µ = (0.9,0). Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 15 / 21

33 Numerical results Figure: Average and maximum errors and error bounds regarding the solution of the problem (left) and the cost functional (right) between the FE and RB approximations. Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 16 / 21

34 Numerical results Offline CPU time: 21 minutes for selecting the RB bases. Online evaluation time (15 basis functions-45 in total for state, control and adjoint) and including the evaluation of the a posteriori error bound is seconds. Figure: speedup with respect to a FE computational time by varying the number of basis functions. Evaluation of the FE solution requires about 1.26 seconds, a speedup equal to 88,32. Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 16 / 21

35 Numerical results We consider a smaller control space, U = span{b 1,b 2 } where b 1 and b 2 L (Ω) are the characteristic functions of Ω 1 and Ω 2 respectively. We introduce a geometrical parameter µ 3 [1,3.5] that defines the length of the domain Ω. We recall the vector cost functional defined as follows: J 1 (y) = 1 2 y y d 2 L 2 (Ω), J 2(y) = 1 2 y 2 L 2 (Ω), J 3(u) = α 2 u 2 U (5) where y d = 1 in Ω 1 and y d = 0.6 in Ω 2. The state function y Y = H0 1 (Ω) solves the following Laplace problem: y = 2 i=1 u ib i in Ω µ, y = 1 on Γ D = Ω µ, (6) where u i R 2 define the control function. Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 17 / 21

36 Numerical results S = {(w 1,w 2 ) R 2 2 : w 1 = J 1 (u),w 2 = J 2 (u),u = u i b i, 30 u i 10}, µ 3 = 3. i=1 Figure: Set of the possible values of the cost functionals J 1 and J 2, by varying the function u. Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 18 / 21

37 Numerical results S = {(w 1,w 2 ) R 2 2 : w 1 = J 1 (u),w 2 = J 2 (u),u = u i b i, 30 u i 10}, i=1 Pareto points µ 1, µ 2 [0,1], µ 3 = 3 Figure: Set of the possible values of the cost functionals J 1 and J 2, by varying the function u and the subset of the efficient points. Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 18 / 21

38 Numerical results S = {(w 1,w 2,w 3 ) R 2 2 : w 1 = J 1 (u),w 2 = J 2 (u),w 3 = J 3 (u)u = u i b i, 30 u i 10} i=1 Pareto points µ 1, µ 2 [0,1], µ 3 = 3 Figure: Feasible points considering J 1, J 2, J 3 by varying u and the subset of the efficient points. Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 18 / 21

39 Sensitivity analysis 10 Random solutions 10 Sensitive solutions Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 19 / 21

40 Sensitivity analysis 20 Random solutions 20 Sensitive solutions Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 19 / 21

41 Sensitivity analysis 30 Random solutions 30 Sensitive solutions Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 19 / 21

42 Sensitivity analysis 60 Random solutions 60 Sensitive solutions Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 19 / 21

43 Sensitivity analysis 100 Random solutions 100 Sensitive solutions Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 19 / 21

44 Sensitivity analysis 100 Random solutions 20 Sensitive solutions Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 19 / 21

45 Conclusions Conclusions Model order reduction strategy proposed for solving the multiobjective optimal problems, characterized by more than one cost functional. The multiobjective problem leads to a parametric optimal control problem through a new parametric cost functional defined as a weighted sum of the original cost functionals. The Pareto optimal points are the optimal controls corresponding to the problem considering a different weighted sum of the cost functionals. The use of the RB method, together with an useful and inexpensive sensitive analysis, allows to drastically reduce the computational times compared with FE. A rigorous error bound analysis permits to ensure a certain level of accuracy of the solution. Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 20 / 21

46 Conclusions THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION! Laura Iapichino Multiobjective PDE-constrained optimization using the reduced basis method 21 / 21

Reduced-Order Multiobjective Optimal Control of Semilinear Parabolic Problems. Laura Iapichino Stefan Trenz Stefan Volkwein

Universität Konstanz Reduced-Order Multiobjective Optimal Control of Semilinear Parabolic Problems Laura Iapichino Stefan Trenz Stefan Volkwein Konstanzer Schriften in Mathematik Nr. 347, Dezember 2015