Principle Component Analysis and Model Reduction for Dynamical Systems

Similar documents
New Directions in the Application of Model Order Reduction

Computation and Application of Balanced Model Order Reduction

Solving Large Scale Lyapunov Equations

BALANCING-RELATED MODEL REDUCTION FOR DATA-SPARSE SYSTEMS

Model Reduction for Linear Dynamical Systems

Model Reduction for Unstable Systems

Gramians of structured systems and an error bound for structure-preserving model reduction

Model Reduction of Inhomogeneous Initial Conditions

CME 345: MODEL REDUCTION

Model reduction for linear systems by balancing

Fluid flow dynamical model approximation and control

Krylov Techniques for Model Reduction of Second-Order Systems

MODEL REDUCTION BY A CROSS-GRAMIAN APPROACH FOR DATA-SPARSE SYSTEMS

Approximation of the Linearized Boussinesq Equations

Gramians based model reduction for hybrid switched systems

Krylov Subspace Methods for Nonlinear Model Reduction

H 2 optimal model reduction - Wilson s conditions for the cross-gramian

Model reduction via tangential interpolation

Gramian Based Model Reduction of Large-scale Dynamical Systems

3 Gramians and Balanced Realizations

Fourier Model Reduction for Large-Scale Applications in Computational Fluid Dynamics

Krylov-Subspace Based Model Reduction of Nonlinear Circuit Models Using Bilinear and Quadratic-Linear Approximations

An iterative SVD-Krylov based method for model reduction of large-scale dynamical systems

Model reduction of large-scale dynamical systems

1 Controllability and Observability

An iterative SVD-Krylov based method for model reduction of large-scale dynamical systems

Problem set 5 solutions 1

Computing Transfer Function Dominant Poles of Large Second-Order Systems

Model reduction of interconnected systems

Robust Multivariable Control

BALANCING-RELATED MODEL REDUCTION FOR LARGE-SCALE SYSTEMS

An iterative SVD-Krylov based method for model reduction of large-scale dynamical systems

ME 234, Lyapunov and Riccati Problems. 1. This problem is to recall some facts and formulae you already know. e Aτ BB e A τ dτ

Balanced Truncation 1

Model reduction of large-scale systems

On Dominant Poles and Model Reduction of Second Order Time-Delay Systems

H 2 -optimal model reduction of MIMO systems

Rational Krylov Methods for Model Reduction of Large-scale Dynamical Systems

Efficient Implementation of Large Scale Lyapunov and Riccati Equation Solvers

Iterative Rational Krylov Algorithm for Unstable Dynamical Systems and Generalized Coprime Factorizations

BALANCING AS A MOMENT MATCHING PROBLEM

Passivity Preserving Model Reduction for Large-Scale Systems. Peter Benner.

Model Order Reduction for Parameter-Varying Systems

Passive Interconnect Macromodeling Via Balanced Truncation of Linear Systems in Descriptor Form

FEL3210 Multivariable Feedback Control

ẋ n = f n (x 1,...,x n,u 1,...,u m ) (5) y 1 = g 1 (x 1,...,x n,u 1,...,u m ) (6) y p = g p (x 1,...,x n,u 1,...,u m ) (7)

Model reduction of large-scale systems by least squares

Fast Frequency Response Analysis using Model Order Reduction

6.241 Dynamic Systems and Control

Adaptive rational Krylov subspaces for large-scale dynamical systems. V. Simoncini

Gramian Based Model Reduction of Large-scale Dynamical Systems

1 Continuous-time Systems

Inexact Solves in Krylov-based Model Reduction

Observability and state estimation

An Interpolation-Based Approach to the Optimal H Model Reduction

Empirical Gramians and Balanced Truncation for Model Reduction of Nonlinear Systems

Parametric Model Order Reduction for Linear Control Systems

Moving Frontiers in Model Reduction Using Numerical Linear Algebra

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science : Dynamic Systems Spring 2011

Hankel Optimal Model Reduction 1

CME 345: MODEL REDUCTION - Projection-Based Model Order Reduction

ECEEN 5448 Fall 2011 Homework #4 Solutions

System Identification by Nuclear Norm Minimization

Raktim Bhattacharya. . AERO 632: Design of Advance Flight Control System. Norms for Signals and Systems

Chris Beattie and Serkan Gugercin

Optimal Approximation of Dynamical Systems with Rational Krylov Methods. Department of Mathematics, Virginia Tech, USA

Comparison of methods for parametric model order reduction of instationary problems

Structure preserving model reduction of network systems

Balancing-Related Model Reduction for Parabolic Control Systems

Control Systems Design

Projection of state space realizations

16.31 Fall 2005 Lecture Presentation Mon 31-Oct-05 ver 1.1

Transient Sensitivity Analysis CASA Day 13th Nov 2007 Zoran Ilievski. Zoran Ilievski Transient Sensitivity Analysis

Lecture 19 Observability and state estimation

CME 345: MODEL REDUCTION

Observability. It was the property in Lyapunov stability which allowed us to resolve that

AN OVERVIEW OF MODEL REDUCTION TECHNIQUES APPLIED TO LARGE-SCALE STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS AND CONTROL MOTIVATING EXAMPLE INVERTED PENDULUM

6.241 Dynamic Systems and Control

CDS Solutions to the Midterm Exam

Control Systems I. Lecture 4: Diagonalization, Modal Analysis, Intro to Feedback. Readings: Emilio Frazzoli

Balancing of Lossless and Passive Systems

Linear Algebra- Final Exam Review

S N. hochdimensionaler Lyapunov- und Sylvestergleichungen. Peter Benner. Mathematik in Industrie und Technik Fakultät für Mathematik TU Chemnitz

Linear dynamical systems with inputs & outputs

CONTROL DESIGN FOR SET POINT TRACKING

Implicit Volterra Series Interpolation for Model Reduction of Bilinear Systems

Karhunen-Loève Approximation of Random Fields Using Hierarchical Matrix Techniques

Zentrum für Technomathematik

A comparison of model reduction techniques from structural dynamics, numerical mathematics and systems and control

Comparison of Model Reduction Methods with Applications to Circuit Simulation

Semidefinite Programming Duality and Linear Time-invariant Systems

Towards high performance IRKA on hybrid CPU-GPU systems

Krylov-based model reduction of second-order systems with proportional damping

Model Reduction (Approximation) of Large-Scale Systems. Introduction, motivating examples and problem formulation Lecture 1

Lecture 2. Linear Systems

S. Gugercin and A.C. Antoulas Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Rice University

BlockMatrixComputations and the Singular Value Decomposition. ATaleofTwoIdeas

MODEL ORDER REDUCTION

The HJB-POD approach for infinite dimensional control problems

Transcription:

Principle Component Analysis and Model Reduction for Dynamical Systems D.C. Sorensen Virginia Tech 12 Nov 2004

Protein Substate Modeling and Identification PCA Dimension Reduction Using the SVD Tod Romo George Phillips T.D. Romo, J.B. Clarage, D.C. Sorensen and G.N. Phillips, Jr., Automatic Identification of Discrete Substates in Proteins: Singular Value Decomposition Analysis of Time Averaged Crystallographic Refinements, Proteins: Structure, Function, and Genetics22,311-321,(1995).

Outline Brief Intro to Model Reduction for Dynamical Systems Reduced Basis Trajectory Time Integration for MD The Symmetric SVD: Reduced Dimension MD Simulation D.C. Sorensen 3

LTI Systems and Model Reduction Time Domain ẋ = Ax + Bu y = Cx A R n n, B R n m, C R p n, n >> m, p Frequency Domain sx = Ax + Bu y = Cx Transfer Function H(s) C(sI A) 1 B, y(s) = H(s)u(s) D.C. Sorensen 4

Model Reduction Construct a new system {Â, ˆB, Ĉ} with LOW dimension k << n ˆx = ˆx + ˆBu ŷ = Ĉˆx Goal: Preserve system response ŷ should approximate y Projection: x(t) = V ˆ x(t) and V ˆx = AVˆx + Bu D.C. Sorensen 5

Model Reduction by (Krylov) Projection Approximate x S V = Range(V) k-diml. subspace i.e. Put x = Vˆx, and then force W T [V ˆx (AVˆx + Bu)] = 0 ŷ = CVˆx If W T V = I k, then the k dimensional reduced model is ˆx = ˆx + ˆBu ŷ = Ĉˆx where  = W T AV, ˆB = W T B, Ĉ = CV. D.C. Sorensen 6

Moment Matching Krylov Subspace Projection Padé via Lanczos (PVL) Freund, Feldmann Bai Multipoint Rational Interpolation Grimme Gallivan, Grimme, Van Dooren Gugercin, Antoulas, Beattie D.C. Sorensen 7

Gramian Based Model Reduction Proper Orthogonal Decomposition (POD) Principle Component Analysis (PCA) The gramian ẋ(t) = f(x(t), u(t)), y = g(x(t), u(t)) Eigenvectors of P Orthogonal Basis P = o x(τ)x(τ) T dτ P = VS 2 V T x(t) = VSw(t) D.C. Sorensen 8

PCA or POD Reduced Basis Low Rank Approximation x V kˆx k (t) Galerkin condition Global Basis ˆx k = Vk T f(v kˆx k (t), u(t)) Global Approximation Error (H 2 bound for LTI) x V kˆx k 2 σ k+1 Snapshot Approximation to P P 1 m x(t j )x(t j ) T m j=1 D.C. Sorensen 9

SVD of Snapshot Trajectory (Conformations) SVD of X: X = [x(t 1 ), x(t 2 ),..., x(t m )] where X = VSW T V k S k W T k V T V = W T W = I n S = diag(σ 1, σ 2,, σ n ) with σ 1 σ 2 σ n. D.C. Sorensen 10

SVD Compression n 100 SVD of Clown m k ( m + n) v.s. m x n Storage 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 k 20 Advantage of SVD Compression 10 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 D.C. Sorensen 11

Image Compression - Feature Detection original rank = 10 rank = 30 rank = 50

POD in CFD Extensive Literature Karhunen-Loéve, L. Sirovich Burns, King Kunisch and Volkwein Many, many others Incorporating Observations Balancing Lall, Marsden and Glavaski K. Willcox and J. Peraire D.C. Sorensen 13

POD for LTI systems Impulse Response: H(t) = C(tI A) 1 B, t 0 Input to State Map: Controllability Gramian: x(t) = e At B P = o x(τ)x(τ) T dτ = o e Aτ BB T e AT τ dτ State to Output Map: Observability Gramian: y(t) = Ce At x(0) Q = o e AT τ C T Ce Aτ dτ D.C. Sorensen 14

Balanced Reduction (Moore 81) Lyapunov Equations for system Gramians AP + PA T + BB T = 0 A T Q + QA + C T C = 0 With P = Q = S : Want Gramians Diagonal and Equal States Difficult to Reach are also Difficult to Observe Reduced Model A k = W T k AV k, B k = W T k B, C k = C k V k PVk = W k S k QW k = V k S k Reduced Model Gramians Pk = S k and Q k = S k. D.C. Sorensen 15

Hankel Norm Error estimate (Glover 84) Why Balanced Realization? Hankel singular values = λ(pq) Model reduction H error (Glover) y ŷ 2 2 (sum neglected singular values) u 2 Extends to MIMO Preserves Stability Key Challenge Approximately solve large scale Lyapunov Equations in Low Rank Factored Form D.C. Sorensen 16

CD Player Impluse Response n = 120 k = 11, tol = 5e-3 Sigma Plot: n = 120 CDplayer 50 Singular Values (db) 0 50 100 150 10 0 10 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 5 Frequency (rad/sec) Error plot 20 Singular Values (db) 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 10 0 10 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 5 Frequency (rad/sec)

CD Player Impluse Response k = 17, tol = 5e-4 Sigma Plot: n = 120 CDplayer 50 Singular Values (db) 0 50 100 150 10 0 10 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 5 Frequency (rad/sec) Error plot 30 Singular Values (db) 40 50 60 70 80 10 0 10 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 5 Frequency (rad/sec)

CD Player Impluse Response k = 31, tol = 5e-5 Sigma Plot: n = 120 CDplayer 50 Singular Values (db) 0 50 100 150 10 0 10 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 5 Frequency (rad/sec) Error plot 40 Singular Values (db) 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 0 10 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 5 Frequency (rad/sec)

CD Player - Hankel Singular Values 10 2 Hankel Singular Values 10 0 10 2 10 4 10 6 10 8 10 10 10 12 10 14 0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Reduction of Second Order Systems Mẍ + Gẋ + Kx = Bu y(t) = Cx(t) ˆM ˆx + Ĝ ˆx + ˆKˆx = ˆBu ŷ(t) = Ĉˆx(t) where ˆM = V T MV, etc. with V T V = I. Key Point: Preserve Second Order Form DO NOT convert to First Order Sys. Keeps Physical Meaning - can be built D.C. Sorensen 21

Applications Mechanical Systems Electrical Systems MEMS devices e.g. Building Model N = 26394, k = 200 (ROM) Frequency Response α =.67, β =.0032 5 reduced original 4.5 4 3.5 Response G( jω) 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Frequency ω D.C. Sorensen 22

Error Bound for Second Order Systems A. Antoulas, C. Teng Controllability Gramian - Impulse Response P := 0 x(t)x(t) dt. Reduce with Dominant Eigenspace P: PV 1 = V 1 S 1 Bounded H 2 norm of error system E = Σ ˆΣ E 2 H 2 C o tr{s 2 } Key: Expression for P in frequency domain. D.C. Sorensen 23

PCA Model Reduction for Molecular Dynamics Rachel Vincent Monte Pettitt D.C. Sorensen 24

Classical Equations of Motion Molecular dynamics (MD) simulation is a computational tool used to study a molecular system as it evolves through time. Newton s second law of motion governs atomic motion in MD: M r(t) = V(r(t)). r(t) = vector of atomic coordinates at time t = [x 1t y 1t z 1t x Nat y Nat z Nat] T M = diagonal matrix of atomic masses V(r(t)) = potential energy function D.C. Sorensen 25

Time Step Barrier fs Example: DHFR (dihydrofolate reductase), 23,558 atoms To realize a microsecond simulation with a time step of 2 fs would require about 13 months of simulation time when utilizing 126 processors. Time with respect to simulation using the NAMD program (Not Another Molecular Dynamics program) on an Origin 2000 R10000/250. D.C. Sorensen 26

PCA Reduced Basis Simulation MVÿ(t) = V(Vy(t)) ˆMÿ(t) = V T V(Vy(t)) 1. Initial Basis V: truncated SVD of short traditional MD trajectory using ARPACK. 2. Approximate the reduced basis potential energy with Radial Basis Fit. 3. Update reduced basis positions y and velocities ẏ in k dimensions using the approximate potential. 4. Reconstruct 3ND trajectory r = Vy. 5. Update and truncate reduced basis and perform full space correction as needed. D.C. Sorensen 27

Remarks Butane (n = 42): 80% to 90% of the total motion with 10-15 LSVs (24% - 36% DOF) Reduced Simulation times order of seconds Traditional MD simulation took several minutes. BPTI(n = 2700): 80% to 90% of the total motion with 300-500 LSVs (11% - 19% DOF) Reduced Simulation times order of minutes Traditional MD simulation took several hours. D.C. Sorensen 28

Symmetry Preserving SVD (Mili Shah) Collaboration with the Physical and Biological Computing Group Lydia Kavraki Mark Moll David Schwarz Amarda Shehua Allison Heath D.C. Sorensen 29

Symmetry in HIV-1 protease Backbone representation of HIV-1 protease (from M. Moll) bound to an inhibitor (shown in orange) Uses PCA dimension reduction of Molecular Dynamics Simulations Symmetry across a plane should be present D.C. Sorensen 30

Animation: Symmetric SVD Approximation Comparison of Regular and Symmetric Preserving SVD 1.5 Comparison of Regular and Symmetric Preserving SVD 1.5 1 1 0.5 0.5 0 0 0.5 0.5 1 1 1.5 1.5 1 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 1.5 1.5 1 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 click below figures for movies D.C. Sorensen 31

Finding the Plane of Symmetry Suppose X = [x 1, x 2,..., x n ] and Y = [y 1, y 2,..., y n ] are two sets of points symmetric across a plane Exact symmetry condition: Y = (I 2ww T )X, where w is the normal to the (hyper-) Plane of Symmetry H = {x : w T x = 0} Remark: In Numerical Linear Algebra (I 2ww T ) is a Householder Transformation or Elementary Reflector D.C. Sorensen 32

Best Approximate Plane of Symmetry Symmetry condition with Noise: Y = (I 2w o w T o )X + E, Problem: Compute a unit vector w that gives the best Approximate Plane of Symmetry Solution: min w Y (I 2wwT )X F, (XY T + YX T )v = vλ min, w = v gives the normal w to the best approximate plane of symmetry D.C. Sorensen 33

Supressing Outlier Effects Iteratively determine diagonal weighting matrix D w The i-th diagonal of D w is 1/discrepancy, discrepancy = y i (I 2ww T )x i Problem: Compute a unit vector w that gives the best Weighted Approximate Plane of Symmetry Solution: min v [Y (I 2vv T )X]D w F, (XD 2 w Y T + YD 2 w X T )v = vλ min, w v gives the normal w to the best weighted approximate plane of symmetry D.C. Sorensen 34

Finding Normal to Best Plane of Symmetry 1 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 1 0.5 0 0.5 1 click below for movie D.C. Sorensen 35

The Symmetric SVD Approximation If WX 2 = X 1 + E where W = blockdiag(i 2ww T ) min WˆX 2 =ˆX 1 Solved by: with ( X1 X 2 U = 1 2 ( U1 U 2 ) ( ) ˆX 1 2 ˆX 2 F and ( ˆX 1 ˆX 2 ) = USV T ), S = 2S 1, V = V 1. and U 2 = WU 1, U 1 S 1 V T 1 = 1 2 (X 1 + WX 2 ) D.C. Sorensen 36

Symmetric Major Modes: HIV-1 protease Major mode regular SVD is red Major mode SYMMETRIC SVD is blue 3120 atoms (3*3120=9360 degrees of freedom) MD trajectory consisted of 10000 conformations (NAMD) SVD and SymSVD used P ARPACK on a Linux cluster dual-processor nodes; 1600MHz AMD Athlon processors, 1GB RAM per node. 1GB/s Ethernet connection. 12 Processors = 6 nodes. First 10 standard singular vectors: 88 secs. First 10 symmetric singular vectors: 131 secs. D.C. Sorensen 37

Animation: Symmetric SVD on HIV1 Protease click for movie Red = Unsymmetric Blue = Symmetric First SVD mode Symmetric vs. Unsymmetric D.C. Sorensen 38

Rotational Symmetry 1.5 Perfect Rotational Symmetry No Noise 1 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 1.5 1 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 X j = WX j 1, j = 1 : k 1, where W = I QGQ T I p G is a rotation X k = X 0. D.C. Sorensen 39

Finding the Axis of Rotation q is an axis of rotation iff Q T q = 0 q T W = q T (I QGQ T ) = q T q T X 0 = q T X j Let M = (k 1)X 0 k 1 j=1 X j min q =1 MT q (= 0 if exact symmetry holds) Good for noisy data (for another condition see Minovic,Ishikawa and Kato ) D.C. Sorensen 40

Best Rotationally Symmetric Approximation If W k j X j = X 0 + E j, j = 1 : k 1 min bx j+1 =W b X j X 0 : X k 1 X 0 : X k 1 2 F = 1 k 1 E j 2 F k, j=0 [ XT 0... X ] T T k 1 = USV T with U = 1 [U T 0... U T k 1 k ] T U 0 S 0 V T 0 = 1 k (X 0 + W k 1 X 1 + W k 2 X 2 +... + WX k 1 ). S = ks 0 V = V 0 U j = W j U 0, j = 0, 1, 2,..., k 1 D.C. Sorensen 41

Animation: Rotationally Symmetric SVD Approximation Comparison of Symmetric and Regular SVD 1.5 Comparison of Symmetric and Regular SVD 1.5 1 1 0.5 0.5 0 0 0.5 0.5 1 1 1.5 1.5 1 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 1.5 1.5 1 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 click below figures for movies D.C. Sorensen 42

Animation: Rotationally Symmetric SVD on HIV1 click for movie Red = Unsymmetric Blue = Symmetric Second SVD mode Rotationally Symmetric vs. Unsymmetric D.C. Sorensen 43

Potential for Symmetric SVD Obtain a Symmetric PCA reduced dimension approximate trajectory Test Hypothesis of Symmetry in an Unknown Protein Locate Symmeteric Sub-Structures Things to Do: Improve convergence rate for finding w Give a complete analysis of convergence Give a complete analysis of discrepancy weighting Extend to more complex symmetries Find New Applications D.C. Sorensen 44

Contact Info. e-mail: sorensen@rice.edu web page: www.caam.rice.edu/ sorensen/ ARPACK: www.caam.rice.edu/software/arpack/