Numerical Analysis of Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients

Similar documents
What Should We Do with Radioactive Waste?

Monte Carlo Methods for Uncertainty Quantification

Application of QMC methods to PDEs with random coefficients

Multilevel Monte Carlo methods for highly heterogeneous media

What s new in high-dimensional integration? designing for applications

A non-standard Finite Element Method based on boundary integral operators

Solving the steady state diffusion equation with uncertainty Final Presentation

UNCERTAINTY QUANTIFICATION IN LIQUID COMPOSITE MOULDING PROCESSES

Hot new directions for QMC research in step with applications

Optimisation under Uncertainty with Stochastic PDEs for the History Matching Problem in Reservoir Engineering

Quasi-Monte Carlo integration over the Euclidean space and applications

Multilevel Sequential 2 Monte Carlo for Bayesian Inverse Problems

Bath Institute For Complex Systems

Stochastic Collocation Methods for Polynomial Chaos: Analysis and Applications

Quasi-optimal and adaptive sparse grids with control variates for PDEs with random diffusion coefficient

Sparse polynomial chaos expansions in engineering applications

Numerical Approximation of Stochastic Elliptic Partial Differential Equations

Research Article Multiresolution Analysis for Stochastic Finite Element Problems with Wavelet-Based Karhunen-Loève Expansion

Solving the stochastic steady-state diffusion problem using multigrid

Solving the Stochastic Steady-State Diffusion Problem Using Multigrid

Efficient Solvers for Stochastic Finite Element Saddle Point Problems

Uncertainty Quantification and hypocoercivity based sensitivity analysis for multiscale kinetic equations with random inputs.

Introduction to Aspects of Multiscale Modeling as Applied to Porous Media

Uncertainty Quantification for multiscale kinetic equations with random inputs. Shi Jin. University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA

Multi-Element Probabilistic Collocation Method in High Dimensions

Analysis and Computation of Hyperbolic PDEs with Random Data

MULTISCALE FINITE ELEMENT METHODS FOR STOCHASTIC POROUS MEDIA FLOW EQUATIONS AND APPLICATION TO UNCERTAINTY QUANTIFICATION

Dinesh Kumar, Mehrdad Raisee and Chris Lacor

Dynamic System Identification using HDMR-Bayesian Technique

arxiv: v1 [math.na] 7 Nov 2017

arxiv: v2 [math.na] 8 Apr 2017

Bayesian Inverse problem, Data assimilation and Localization

Uncertainty Quantification for multiscale kinetic equations with high dimensional random inputs with sparse grids

Probabilistic collocation and Lagrangian sampling for tracer transport in randomly heterogeneous porous media

Block-diagonal preconditioning for spectral stochastic finite-element systems

Implementation of Sparse Wavelet-Galerkin FEM for Stochastic PDEs

Low-rank techniques applied to moment equations for the stochastic Darcy problem with lognormal permeability

Uncertainty Quantification of Two-Phase Flow in Heterogeneous Porous Media

Uncertainty Quantification in Computational Models

Bayesian Inverse Problems

Two new developments in Multilevel Monte Carlo methods

Quantifying Uncertainty: Modern Computational Representation of Probability and Applications

Multilevel accelerated quadrature for elliptic PDEs with random diffusion. Helmut Harbrecht Mathematisches Institut Universität Basel Switzerland

Uncertainty quantification of engineering systems using the multilevel Monte Carlo method

arxiv: v2 [math.na] 17 Oct 2017

Probabilistic Collocation Method for Uncertainty Analysis of Soil Infiltration in Flood Modelling

Dynamic Data Driven Simulations in Stochastic Environments

PRECONDITIONING MARKOV CHAIN MONTE CARLO SIMULATIONS USING COARSE-SCALE MODELS

Characterization of heterogeneous hydraulic conductivity field via Karhunen-Loève expansions and a measure-theoretic computational method

Stochastic simulation of Advection-Diffusion equation considering uncertainty in input variables

Underground nuclear waste storage

A new Hierarchical Bayes approach to ensemble-variational data assimilation

Stochastic collocation and mixed finite elements for flow in porous media

Stochastic Elastic-Plastic Finite Element Method for Performance Risk Simulations

Beyond Wiener Askey Expansions: Handling Arbitrary PDFs

Uncertainty Quantification in Discrete Fracture Network Models

Scalable Algorithms for Optimal Control of Systems Governed by PDEs Under Uncertainty

Introduction to Computational Stochastic Differential Equations

Numerical Schemes and Computational Studies for Dynamically Orthogonal Equations. Mattheus P. Ueckermann Pierre F. J. Lermusiaux Themis P.

STOCHASTIC CONTINUUM ANALYSIS OF GROUNDWATER FLOW PATHS FOR SAFETY ASSESSMENT OF A RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY

Uncertainty Quantification and related areas - An overview

Multilevel Monte Carlo for two phase flow and transport in random heterogeneous porous media

A Kernel-based Collocation Method for Elliptic Partial Differential Equations with Random Coefficients

Introduction to Aspects of Multiscale Modeling as Applied to Porous Media

Statistical Rock Physics

At A Glance. UQ16 Mobile App.

FAST QMC MATRIX-VECTOR MULTIPLICATION

c 2018 Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics

Stochastic Spectral Approaches to Bayesian Inference

A Stochastic Collocation based. for Data Assimilation

Parametric Problems, Stochastics, and Identification

. Frobenius-Perron Operator ACC Workshop on Uncertainty Analysis & Estimation. Raktim Bhattacharya

Hierarchical Parallel Solution of Stochastic Systems

arxiv: v2 [math.na] 8 Sep 2017

ASSESSMENT OF COLLOCATION AND GALERKIN APPROACHES TO LINEAR DIFFUSION EQUATIONS WITH RANDOM DATA

RADIONUCLIDE DIFFUSION IN GEOLOGICAL MEDIA

Karhunen-Loève Approximation of Random Fields Using Hierarchical Matrix Techniques

Seminar: Data Assimilation

Adaptive Collocation with Kernel Density Estimation

Steps in Uncertainty Quantification

Sampling and low-rank tensor approximation of the response surface

Training Venue and Dates Ref # Reservoir Geophysics October, 2019 $ 6,500 London

Numerical Solution I

Introduction to Uncertainty Quantification in Computational Science Handout #3

Numerical Solution for Random Forced SPDE via Galerkin Finite Element Method

Sequential Importance Sampling for Rare Event Estimation with Computer Experiments

Solving Pure Torsion Problem and Modelling Radionuclide Migration Using Radial Basis Functions

A regularized least-squares method for sparse low-rank approximation of multivariate functions

SAFETY ASSESSMENT CODES FOR THE NEAR-SURFACE DISPOSAL OF LOW AND INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE WITH THE COMPARTMENT MODEL: SAGE AND VR-KHNP

Quasi-Monte Carlo Methods for Applications in Statistics

Model Inversion for Induced Seismicity

Subsurface ow with uncertainty : applications and numerical analysis issues

arxiv: v1 [math.na] 3 Apr 2019

c 2004 Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics

IGD-TP Exchange Forum n 5 WG1 Safety Case: Handling of uncertainties October th 2014, Kalmar, Sweden

Simulating with uncertainty : the rough surface scattering problem

MACHINE LEARNING FOR PRODUCTION FORECASTING: ACCURACY THROUGH UNCERTAINTY

Schwarz Preconditioner for the Stochastic Finite Element Method

INTERPOLATION AND UPDATE IN DYNAMIC DATA-DRIVEN APPLICATION SIMULATIONS

Research Collection. Basics of structural reliability and links with structural design codes FBH Herbsttagung November 22nd, 2013.

Transcription:

Numerical Analysis of Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients (Lecture I) Robert Scheichl Department of Mathematical Sciences University of Bath Workshop on PDEs with Random Coefficients Weierstrass Institute, Berlin, 13 15 November, 2013 R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 1 / 18

Outline Lecture 1 Numerical Analysis of Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients Motivation: uncertainty/lack of data & stochastic modelling Examples of PDEs with random data Model problem: groundwater flow and radwaste disposal Elliptic PDEs with rough stochastic coefficients What are the computational/analytical challenges? Numerical Analysis Assumptions, existence, uniqueness, regularity FE analysis: Cea Lemma, interpolation error, functionals Variational crimes (truncation error, quadrature) Mixed finite element methods R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 2 / 18

Outline Lecture 2 Novel Monte Carlo Methods and Uncertainty Quantification Stochastic Uncertainty Quantification (in PDEs) The Curse of Dimensionality & the Monte Carlo Method Multilevel Monte Carlo methods Analysis of multilevel MC for the elliptic model problem Quasi Monte Carlo methods Analysis of QMC for the elliptic model problem Bayesian Inference (stochastic inverse problems): Multilevel Markov Chain Monte Carlo R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 3 / 18

Stochastic Modelling Many reasons for stochastic modelling: lack of data (e.g. data assimilation for weather prediction) data uncertainty (e.g. uncertainty quantification in subsurface flow) parameter identification (e.g. Bayesian inference in structural engineering) unresolvable scales (e.g. atmospheric dispersion modelling) R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 4 / 18

Stochastic Modelling Many reasons for stochastic modelling: lack of data (e.g. data assimilation for weather prediction) data uncertainty (e.g. uncertainty quantification in subsurface flow) parameter identification (e.g. Bayesian inference in structural engineering) unresolvable scales (e.g. atmospheric dispersion modelling) Input: best knowledge about system (PDE), statistics of input parameters, measured ouput data with error statistics,... R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 4 / 18

Stochastic Modelling Many reasons for stochastic modelling: lack of data (e.g. data assimilation for weather prediction) data uncertainty (e.g. uncertainty quantification in subsurface flow) parameter identification (e.g. Bayesian inference in structural engineering) unresolvable scales (e.g. atmospheric dispersion modelling) Input: best knowledge about system (PDE), statistics of input parameters, measured ouput data with error statistics,... Output: stats of quantities of interest or entire state space often very sparse (or no) output data need a good physical model! Data assimilation in NWP: data misfit, rainfall at some location Radioactive waste disposal: flow at repository, breakthrough time Oil reservoir simulation: production rate Certification of carbon fibre composites in aeronautical engineering R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 4 / 18

Examples Navier Stokes (e.g. modelling plane or forecasting weather): ρ v + v v t = p + µ 2 v + f in Ω subject to IC v (x, 0) = v0 (x) R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients + BCs WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 5 / 18

Examples Navier Stokes (e.g. modelling plane or forecasting weather): ρ(ω) v + v v t = p + µ(ω) 2 v + f in Ω subject to IC v (x, 0) = v0 (x) R. Scheichl (Bath) + Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients BCs WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 5 / 18

Examples Navier Stokes (e.g. modelling plane or forecasting weather): ( ) v ρ(ω) t + v v = p + µ(ω) 2 v + f(x, ω) in Ω(ω) subject to IC v(x, 0) = v 0 (x, ω) + BCs uncertain ICs data assimilation R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 5 / 18

Examples Structural Mechanics (e.g. composites, tires or bone): ( C : 1 [ ]) u + u T + F = 0 in Ω 2 subject to BCs R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 6 / 18

Examples Structural Mechanics (e.g. composites, tires or bone): ( C(x, ω) : 1 [ ]) u + u T + F = 0 in Ω 2 subject to BCs R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 6 / 18

Examples Structural Mechanics (e.g. composites, tires or bone): ( C(x, ω) : 1 [ ]) u + u T + F(x, ω) = 0 in Ω(ω) 2 subject to BCs contact problems A. Chernov fibre defects R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 6 / 18

Examples Waves in Heterogeneous Media (e.g. seismic or optics): photonic crystal fibre design Subsurface Fluid Flow (e.g. oil reservoir simulation): optimal well placement R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 7 / 18

Model Problem: Uncertainty in Groundwater Flow (e.g. risk analysis of radwaste disposal or CO2 sequestration) Darcy s Law: Incompressibility: q + k p = f + Boundary Conditions q = g R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 8 / 18

Model Problem: Uncertainty in Groundwater Flow (e.g. risk analysis of radwaste disposal or CO2 sequestration) EDZ CROWN SPACE Darcy s Law: q + k(x, ω) p = f (x, ω) Incompressibility: q = g(x, ω) WASTE VAULTS FAULTED GRANITE GRANITE DEEP SKIDDAW N-S SKIDDAW DEEP LATTERBARROW N-S LATTERBARROW FAULTED TOP M-F BVG TOP M-F BVG FAULTED BLEAWATH BVG BLEAWATH BVG FAULTED F-H BVG + Boundary Conditions FAULTED UNDIFF BVG UNDIFF BVG FAULTED N-S BVG N-S BVG F-H BVG Uncertainty in k = Uncertainty in p & q Stochastic Modelling! FAULTED CARB LST CARB LST FAULTED COLLYHURST COLLYHURST FAULTED BROCKRAM BROCKRAM SHALES + EVAP FAULTED BNHM BOTTOM NHM FAULTED DEEP ST BEES DEEP ST BEES FAULTED N-S ST BEES N-S ST BEES FAULTED VN-S ST BEES VN-S ST BEES FAULTED DEEP CALDER DEEP CALDER FAULTED N-S CALDER N-S CALDER FAULTED VN-S CALDER VN-S CALDER MERCIA MUDSTONE QUATERNARY Geology at Sellafield (former potential UK radwaste site) c NIREX UK Ltd. R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 8 / 18

Application: Longterm radioactive waste disposal UK EPSRC funded research project with A Cliffe (Nottingham) & M Giles (Oxford) Total current UK Waste (intermediate & highly radioactive): 220,000 m 3 would stand about 17m deep on the pitch in Wembley Stadium R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 9 / 18

Application: Longterm radioactive waste disposal UK EPSRC funded research project with A Cliffe (Nottingham) & M Giles (Oxford) Total current UK Waste (intermediate & highly radioactive): 220,000 m 3 would stand about 17m deep on the pitch in Wembley Stadium Long term solution: deep geological disposal (CoRWM July 2006, HMG October 2006) Multiple barriers: mechanical, chemical, physical R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 9 / 18

Application: Longterm radioactive waste disposal UK EPSRC funded research project with A Cliffe (Nottingham) & M Giles (Oxford) Total current UK Waste (intermediate & highly radioactive): 220,000 m 3 would stand about 17m deep on the pitch in Wembley Stadium Long term solution: deep geological disposal (CoRWM July 2006, HMG October 2006) Multiple barriers: mechanical, chemical, physical Assessing safety of potential sites of utmost importance (long timescales of 1000s of years) modelling essential!! R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 9 / 18

Application: Longterm radioactive waste disposal UK EPSRC funded research project with A Cliffe (Nottingham) & M Giles (Oxford) Total current UK Waste (intermediate & highly radioactive): 220,000 m 3 would stand about 17m deep on the pitch in Wembley Stadium Long term solution: deep geological disposal (CoRWM July 2006, HMG October 2006) Multiple barriers: mechanical, chemical, physical Assessing safety of potential sites of utmost importance (long timescales of 1000s of years) modelling essential!! UK Gov Policy: Allow building new nuclear power stations, but waste disposal problem has to be solved first! R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 9 / 18

Application: Longterm radioactive waste disposal UK EPSRC funded research project with A Cliffe (Nottingham) & M Giles (Oxford) Total current UK Waste (intermediate & highly radioactive): 220,000 m 3 would stand about 17m deep on the pitch in Wembley Stadium Long term solution: deep geological disposal (CoRWM July 2006, HMG October 2006) Multiple barriers: mechanical, chemical, physical Assessing safety of potential sites of utmost importance (long timescales of 1000s of years) modelling essential!! UK Gov Policy: Allow building new nuclear power stations, but waste disposal problem has to be solved first! Key aspect: How to quantify uncertainties in the models? R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 9 / 18

WIPP (Waste Isolation Pilot Plant) Test Problem US Dept of Energy Radioactive Waste Repository in New Mexico Cross section through the rock at the WIPP site R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 10 / 18

WIPP (Waste Isolation Pilot Plant) Test Problem US Dept of Energy Radioactive Waste Repository in New Mexico Principal pathway for transport of radionuclides is Culebra dolomite layer (2D to reasonable approximation) Given measurements of k and p at a few locations Quantities of interest: flux at repository, breakthrough time, amount of spreading through heterogeneity Cross section through the rock at the WIPP site R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 10 / 18

WIPP (Waste Isolation Pilot Plant) Test Problem US Dept of Energy Radioactive Waste Repository in New Mexico Cross section through the rock at the WIPP site Principal pathway for transport of radionuclides is Culebra dolomite layer (2D to reasonable approximation) Given measurements of k and p at a few locations Quantities of interest: flux at repository, breakthrough time, amount of spreading through heterogeneity Uncertainty in data Uncertainty in predictions PDE with random coeff. k R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 10 / 18

WIPP (Waste Isolation Pilot Plant) Test Problem Ernst US Dept of Energy Radioactive Waste Repository in New Mexico Cross section through the rock at the WIPP site Principal pathway for transport of radionuclides is Culebra dolomite layer (2D to reasonable approximation) Given measurements of k and p at a few locations Quantities of interest: flux at repository, breakthrough time, amount of spreading through heterogeneity Uncertainty in data Uncertainty in predictions PDE with random coeff. k R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 10 / 18

Stochastic Modelling of Uncertainty (simplified) Model uncertain conductivity tensor k as a random field k(x, ω) R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 11 / 18

Stochastic Modelling of Uncertainty (simplified) Model uncertain conductivity tensor k as a random field k(x, ω) k(x, ω) isotropic, scalar log k(x, ω) = Gaussian field with isotropic covariance (e.g. Matérn): ( ) x y R(x, y) := σ 2 ρ ν λ Usually: σ 2 > 1, λ < 1 & ν < 1 e.g. ρ 1/2 (r) = exp( r) or ρ (r) = exp( r 2 ) Compute statistics (eg. moments) of functionals of p and q. realisation (with λ = 1 64, σ2 = 8) contrast: max x,y k(x) k(y) = O(109 ) (Reasonably good fit to some field data [Gelhar, 1975], [Hoeksema et al, 1985]) R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 11 / 18

Stochastic Modelling of Uncertainty (simplified) Model uncertain conductivity tensor k as a random field k(x, ω) k(x, ω) isotropic, scalar log k(x, ω) = Gaussian field with isotropic covariance (e.g. Matérn): ( ) x y R(x, y) := σ 2 ρ ν λ Usually: σ 2 > 1, λ < 1 & ν < 1 e.g. ρ 1/2 (r) = exp( r) or ρ (r) = exp( r 2 ) Compute statistics (eg. moments) of functionals of p and q. Inverse problem MCMC realisation (with λ = 1 64, σ2 = 8) contrast: max x,y k(x) k(y) = O(109 ) (Reasonably good fit to some field data [Gelhar, 1975], [Hoeksema et al, 1985]) R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 11 / 18

Typical Quantities of Interest 1 Expected value / moments / CDF / PDF of 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 λ = 0.3 and σ 2 = 4 pressure p or flux q (point evaluations, norms, averages) particle position at time t travel time (to boundary), etc... R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 12 / 18

Typical Quantities of Interest 1 Expected value / moments / CDF / PDF of 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 λ = 0.3 and σ 2 = 4 pressure p or flux q (point evaluations, norms, averages) particle position at time t travel time (to boundary), etc... More Realistic Examples (e.g. Sellafield site or SPE10 Benchmark) R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 12 / 18

Key Computational Challenges PDEs with Highly Heterogeneous Random Coefficients (k(x, ω) p(x, ω)) = f (x, ω), x D R d, ω Ω (prob. space) R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 13 / 18

Key Computational Challenges PDEs with Highly Heterogeneous Random Coefficients (k(x, ω) p(x, ω)) = f (x, ω), x D R d, ω Ω (prob. space) Sampling from random field (log k(x, ω) Gaussian): truncated Karhunen-Loève expansion of log k matrix factorisation, e.g. circulant embedding (FFT) via pseudodifferential precision operator (PDE solves) R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 13 / 18

Key Computational Challenges PDEs with Highly Heterogeneous Random Coefficients (k(x, ω) p(x, ω)) = f (x, ω), x D R d, ω Ω (prob. space) Sampling from random field (log k(x, ω) Gaussian): truncated Karhunen-Loève expansion of log k matrix factorisation, e.g. circulant embedding (FFT) via pseudodifferential precision operator (PDE solves) High-Dimensional Integration (especially w.r.t. posterior): stochastic Galerkin/collocation (+sparse) Monte Carlo, QMC & Markov Chain MC R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 13 / 18

Key Computational Challenges PDEs with Highly Heterogeneous Random Coefficients (k(x, ω) p(x, ω)) = f (x, ω), x D R d, ω Ω (prob. space) Sampling from random field (log k(x, ω) Gaussian): truncated Karhunen-Loève expansion of log k matrix factorisation, e.g. circulant embedding (FFT) via pseudodifferential precision operator (PDE solves) High-Dimensional Integration (especially w.r.t. posterior): stochastic Galerkin/collocation (+sparse) Monte Carlo, QMC & Markov Chain MC Solve large number of multiscale deterministic PDEs: Efficient discretisation & FE error analysis Multigrid Methods, AMG, DD Methods R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 13 / 18

Key Computational Challenges PDEs with Highly Heterogeneous Random Coefficients (k(x, ω) p(x, ω)) = f (x, ω), x D R d, ω Ω (prob. space) Sampling from random field (log k(x, ω) Gaussian): truncated Karhunen-Loève expansion of log k Lecture 1 matrix factorisation, e.g. circulant embedding (FFT) via pseudodifferential precision operator (PDE solves) High-Dimensional Integration (especially w.r.t. posterior): stochastic Galerkin/collocation (+sparse) Matthies,... Monte Carlo, QMC & Markov Chain MC Lecture 2 Solve large number of multiscale deterministic PDEs: Efficient discretisation & FE error analysis Lecture 1 Multigrid Methods, AMG, DD Methods my backgound R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 13 / 18

Why is it computationally so challenging? R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 14 / 18

Why is it computationally so challenging? Low regularity (global): k C 0,η, η < 1 = fine mesh h 1 Large σ 2 & exponential = high contrast k max /k min > 10 6 Small λ = multiscale + high stochast. dimension s > 100 R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 14 / 18

Why is it computationally so challenging? Low regularity (global): k C 0,η, η < 1 = fine mesh h 1 Large σ 2 & exponential = high contrast k max /k min > 10 6 Small λ = multiscale + high stochast. dimension s > 100 e.g. for truncated KL expansion log k(x, ω) s µj φ j (x)y j (ω) j=1 Remainder j>j µ j in 1D Truncation error of E[ p L2(0,1)] w.r.t. s R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 14 / 18

Why is it computationally so challenging? Lecture 2 Low regularity (global): k C 0,η, η < 1 = fine mesh h 1 Large σ 2 & exponential = high contrast k max /k min > 10 6 Small λ = multiscale + high stochast. dimension s > 100 e.g. for truncated KL expansion log k(x, ω) s µj φ j (x)y j (ω) j=1 Remainder j>j µ j in 1D Truncation error of E[ p L2(0,1)] w.r.t. s R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 14 / 18

Why is it mathematically interesting? R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 15 / 18

Why is it mathematically interesting? k min, k max R such that 0 < k min k(x, ω) k max < a.e. in D Ω. Cannot apply Lax-Milgram directly to show! All bounds need to be explicit in coefficient Need weight functions near boundary in QMC analysis R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 15 / 18

Why is it mathematically interesting? k min, k max R such that 0 < k min k(x, ω) k max < a.e. in D Ω. Cannot apply Lax-Milgram directly to show! All bounds need to be explicit in coefficient Need weight functions near boundary in QMC analysis Typically only k(, ω) C η (D) with η < 1 Do not have full regularity, i.e. p(ω, ) / H 2 (D) Have to work in fractional-order Sobolev spaces R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 15 / 18

Why is it mathematically interesting? k min, k max R such that 0 < k min k(x, ω) k max < a.e. in D Ω. Cannot apply Lax-Milgram directly to show! All bounds need to be explicit in coefficient Need weight functions near boundary in QMC analysis Typically only k(, ω) C η (D) with η < 1 Do not have full regularity, i.e. p(ω, ) / H 2 (D) Have to work in fractional-order Sobolev spaces Differential operator is not affine in the stochastic parameters R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 15 / 18

Why is it mathematically interesting? k min, k max R such that 0 < k min k(x, ω) k max < a.e. in D Ω. Cannot apply Lax-Milgram directly to show! All bounds need to be explicit in coefficient Need weight functions near boundary in QMC analysis Typically only k(, ω) C η (D) with η < 1 Do not have full regularity, i.e. p(ω, ) / H 2 (D) Have to work in fractional-order Sobolev spaces Differential operator is not affine in the stochastic parameters Results need to be explicit and uniform in s R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 15 / 18

Stochastic Finite Element Analysis R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 16 / 18

The Pioneers (in Stochastic Finite Elements) Structural Engineers (from the 1980s): H Contreras, The Stochastic Finite-Element Method, Computers & Structures, 1980... Spanos & Ghanem s book in 1991 (their first paper is 1989) R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 17 / 18

The Pioneers (in Stochastic Finite Elements) Structural Engineers (from the 1980s): H Contreras, The Stochastic Finite-Element Method, Computers & Structures, 1980... Spanos & Ghanem s book in 1991 (their first paper is 1989) Numerical Analysts (from 1997): Matthies, Babuska, Knio, Le Maitre, Karniadakis, Xiu, Schwab, Tempone, Elman, Ernst, Nobile, Nouy,... R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 17 / 18

The Pioneers (in Stochastic Finite Elements) Structural Engineers (from the 1980s): H Contreras, The Stochastic Finite-Element Method, Computers & Structures, 1980... Spanos & Ghanem s book in 1991 (their first paper is 1989) Numerical Analysts (from 1997): Matthies, Babuska, Knio, Le Maitre, Karniadakis, Xiu, Schwab, Tempone, Elman, Ernst, Nobile, Nouy,... Analysis for Lognormal Coefficients (from 2009): Galvis, Sarkis, Gittelson, Ullmann, Charrier,... R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 17 / 18

My Collaborators KA Cliffe (Nottingham) M Giles (Oxford) AL Teckentrup (Florida State, previously Bath) J Charrier (Marseille) E Ullmann (Bath) IG Graham (Bath) F Kuo (UNSW Sydney) IH Sloan (UNSW Sydney) D Nuyens (Leuven) J Nicholls (UNSW Sydney) Ch Schwab (ETH Zürich) Ch Ketelsen (Boulder) R. Scheichl (Bath) Elliptic PDEs with Random Coefficients WIAS Berlin, Nov 2013 18 / 18