SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 1503.00307

How to best sample a solution manifold?

Abstract

Model reduction attempts to guarantee a desired "model quality", e.g. given in terms of accuracy requirements, with as small a model size as possible. This article highlights some recent developments concerning this issue for the so called Reduced Basis Method (RBM) for models based on parameter dependent families of PDEs. In this context the key task is to sample the {\em solution manifold} at judiciously chosen parameter values usually determined in a {\em greedy fashion}. The corresponding {\em space growth} concepts are closely related to so called {\em weak greedy} algorithms in Hilbert and Banach spaces which can be shown to give rise to convergence rates comparable to the best possible rates, namely the {\em Kolmogorov $n$-widths} rates. Such algorithms can be interpreted as {\em adaptive sampling} strategies for approximating compact sets in Hilbert spaces. We briefly discuss the results most relevant for the present RBM context. The applicability of the results for weak greedy algorithms has however been confined so far essentially to well-conditioned coercive problems. A critical issue is therefore an extension of these concepts to a wider range of problem classes for which the conventional methods do not work well. A second main topic of this article is therefore to outline recent developments of RBMs that do realize $n$-width rates for a much wider class of variational problems covering indefinite or singularly perturbed unsymmetric problems. A key element in this context is the design of {\em well-conditioned variational formulations} and their numerical treatment via saddle point formulations. We conclude with some remarks concerning the relevance of uniformly approximating the whole solution manifold also when the {\em quantity of interest} is only of a {\em functional} of the parameter dependent solutions.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Wolfgang Dahmen. 2015-03-01. How to best sample a solution manifold?. https://arxiv.org/abs/1503.00307

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Stress-divergence, Laplacian, and rotational forms of the incompressible Navier--Stokes equations with variable viscosity

In the Navier--Stokes equations, incompressibility allows rewriting the viscous term in various forms leading to distinct numerical properties and flow descriptions. Furthermore, models accounting for non-Newtonian, thermal or turbulent effects often break the constant-viscosity assumption, thereby producing additional consistency terms. In this context, the present work compares the classical symmetric-gradient diffusion term with more recent variable-viscosity generalizations of the Laplacian and rotational forms. We discuss, analyze and test their differences with respect to implementation, efficiency, numerical stability and outflow boundary conditions. With a focus on time-dependent flows, we consider second-order implicit-explicit (IMEX) temporal discretizations aimed at improving efficiency and numerical stability. Through a rigorous stability analysis, we show how selected explicit treatments can bypass algorithmic nonlinearities without inducing CFL conditions. Our numerical results highlight important differences between the three viscous formulations---especially in the presence of outflow boundaries, for which the generalized Laplacian form proves more suitable in diffusion-dominated regimes. %(as widely known for constant viscosity).

math.NA

Full-window branch discovery and loss-selected EnKF continuation for data assimilation

We develop a framework for offline full-window branch discovery, optionally followed by online continuation with an ensemble Kalman filter (EnKF). Three mechanisms drive the branch search: adjoint path-kernel (APK) differentiation balances kernel differentiation and correction-stabilized path perturbation, shifting the optimization from exploration to exploitation; an optimized Gaussian initial law broadens the search over initial-state basins; and loss-weighted mixing across independent runs recombines successful path components. We may then select an interior state using a local loss and continue online with an EnKF. In 40-dimensional Lorenz-96 experiments, the mean offline path RMSE of APK is 4.3 times smaller than that of population weak-$\mathrm{4D\text{-}Var}_x$. The resulting APK-EnKF method has a mean online RMSE 64 times smaller than that of ordinary EnKF.

math.NA

A variational physics-informed graph neural network for heterogeneous solid mechanics

Stress localization in heterogeneous solids is governed by the bimaterial interface, where the displacement field remains $C^0$-continuous, while in-plane stresses jump due to the stiffness mismatch. Coordinate-based physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) represent this jump via a prescribed regularization width or a weighted interface penalty, making their accuracy sensitive to how phase-contrast changes are handled. This work presents a variational, label-free physics-informed graph neural network (PI-GNN) in which the heterogeneity is carried by the discretization rather than by the trial field. The solver operates on a conforming adaptive mesh graph, assigns constitutive behavior per element, and minimizes the discrete total potential energy as a single unweighted objective in which only first derivatives appear. The discrete energy on piecewise-linear elements coincides with the finite element (FE) Ritz functional. Dirichlet conditions are enforced by construction, with no penalty term, no interface weight, and no prescribed transition width. Using one fixed architecture, optimizer, and loss across small-strain elasticity and finite-strain Neo-Hookean hyperelasticity in two and three dimensions, the von Mises error remains below $3.58\%$ across a stiffness-contrast sweep spanning $(E_{\mathrm{inc}}/E_{\mathrm{mat}}\in[10^{-2},10^{2}])$, where a strong-form PINN degrades to $5.58\%$, and its displacement error reaches $7.66\%$ against $0.49\%$ for the PI-GNN. A trained network halves the ($\sigma_{xx}$) error of an energy-based PINN ($5.01\%$ versus $10.94\%$). Training cost exceeds a single FE solve by more than an order of magnitude, so the construction is a variationally consistent, penalty-free interface representation for parametric surrogates and inverse identification rather than a replacement for a one-off FE analysis.

math.NA