An improved approach to Bayesian computer model calibration and prediction
AI-generated Key Points
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the key points are generated using the paper metadata rather than the full article.
- In the field of calibrating inexact computer models using experimental data:
- Inclusion of a discrepancy function modeled via a Gaussian stochastic process (GaSP) is standard practice.
- Challenges arise when calibration parameters are unidentifiable within the GaSP framework, leading to poor fits with experimental data.
- Mengyang Gu and Long Wang propose the scaled Gaussian stochastic process (S-GaSP):
- Serves as a bridge between $L_2$ calibration and GaSP calibration techniques.
- Offers a computationally feasible solution under the Bayesian paradigm.
- The S-GaSP model:
- Enhances predictive capabilities regardless of the specific discrepancy function used.
- Aims to overcome limitations in existing methods and improve overall model performance.
- Numerical examples demonstrate the effectiveness of the S-GaSP model and highlight its differences from previous approaches.
Authors: Mengyang Gu, Long Wang
Abstract: We consider the problem of calibrating inexact computer models using experimental data. To compensate for the misspecification of the computer model, a discrepancy function is usually included and modeled via a Gaussian stochastic process (GaSP), leading to better results of prediction. The calibration parameters in the computer model, however, sometimes become unidentifiable in the GaSP model, and the calibrated computer model fits the experimental data poorly as a consequence. In this work, we propose the scaled Gaussian stochastic process (S-GaSP), a novel stochastic process for calibration and prediction. This new approach bridges the gap between two predominant methods, namely the $L_2$ calibration and GaSP calibration. A computationally feasible approach is introduced for this new model under the Bayesian paradigm. The S-GaSP model not only provides a general framework for calibration, but also enables the computer model to predict well regardless of the discrepancy function. Numerical examples are also provided to illustrate the connections and differences between this new model and other previous approaches.
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.
Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting
Score: 0
Why do we need votes?
Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.
The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.
⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.
Similar papers summarized with our AI tools
Navigate through even more similar papers through a
tree representationLook for similar papers (in beta version)
By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.