4.2 Article

A Theoretical Framework for Calibration in Computer Models: Parametrization, Estimation and Convergence Properties

Journal

SIAM-ASA JOURNAL ON UNCERTAINTY QUANTIFICATION
Volume 4, Issue 1, Pages 767-795

Publisher

SIAM PUBLICATIONS
DOI: 10.1137/151005841

Keywords

computer experiments; uncertainty quantification; Gaussian process; reproducing kernel Hilbert space

Funding

  1. Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research
  2. U.S. Department of Energy [ERKJ259]
  3. UT-Battelle, LLC [De-AC05-00OR22725]
  4. National Center for Mathematics and Interdisciplinary Sciences, CAS
  5. NSFC [11271355]
  6. NSF [DMS-1308424]
  7. DOE [DE-SC0010548]
  8. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) [DE-SC0010548] Funding Source: U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
  9. Division Of Mathematical Sciences
  10. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [1308424] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Calibration parameters in deterministic computer experiments are those attributes that cannot be measured or are not available in physical experiments. Kennedy and O'Hagan [M. C. Kennedy and A. O'Hagan, J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B Stat. Methodol., 63 (2001), pp. 425-464] suggested an approach to estimating them by using data from physical experiments and computer simulations. A theoretical framework is given which allows us to study the issues of parameter identifiability and estimation. We define the L-2-consistency for calibration as a justification for calibration methods. It is shown that a simplified version of the original Kennedy-O'Hagan (KO) method leads to asymptotically L-2-inconsistent calibration. This L-2-inconsistency can be remedied by modifying the original estimation procedure. A novel calibration method, called L-2 calibration, is proposed, proven to be L-2-consistent, and enjoys optimal convergence rate. A numerical example and some mathematical analysis are used to illustrate the source of the L-2-inconsistency problem.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available