Case Study in Combining Physical and Computer Experiments

α
Dr. Tom Burr
Dr. Tom Burr
σ
Michael S. Hamada
Michael S. Hamada
α Los Alamos National Laboratory Los Alamos National Laboratory

Send Message

To: Author

Case Study in Combining Physical and Computer Experiments

Article Fingerprint

ReserarchID

SFR2GEP3

Case Study in Combining Physical and Computer Experiments Banner

AI TAKEAWAY

Connecting with the Eternal Ground
  • English
  • Afrikaans
  • Albanian
  • Amharic
  • Arabic
  • Armenian
  • Azerbaijani
  • Basque
  • Belarusian
  • Bengali
  • Bosnian
  • Bulgarian
  • Catalan
  • Cebuano
  • Chichewa
  • Chinese (Simplified)
  • Chinese (Traditional)
  • Corsican
  • Croatian
  • Czech
  • Danish
  • Dutch
  • Esperanto
  • Estonian
  • Filipino
  • Finnish
  • French
  • Frisian
  • Galician
  • Georgian
  • German
  • Greek
  • Gujarati
  • Haitian Creole
  • Hausa
  • Hawaiian
  • Hebrew
  • Hindi
  • Hmong
  • Hungarian
  • Icelandic
  • Igbo
  • Indonesian
  • Irish
  • Italian
  • Japanese
  • Javanese
  • Kannada
  • Kazakh
  • Khmer
  • Korean
  • Kurdish (Kurmanji)
  • Kyrgyz
  • Lao
  • Latin
  • Latvian
  • Lithuanian
  • Luxembourgish
  • Macedonian
  • Malagasy
  • Malay
  • Malayalam
  • Maltese
  • Maori
  • Marathi
  • Mongolian
  • Myanmar (Burmese)
  • Nepali
  • Norwegian
  • Pashto
  • Persian
  • Polish
  • Portuguese
  • Punjabi
  • Romanian
  • Russian
  • Samoan
  • Scots Gaelic
  • Serbian
  • Sesotho
  • Shona
  • Sindhi
  • Sinhala
  • Slovak
  • Slovenian
  • Somali
  • Spanish
  • Sundanese
  • Swahili
  • Swedish
  • Tajik
  • Tamil
  • Telugu
  • Thai
  • Turkish
  • Ukrainian
  • Urdu
  • Uzbek
  • Vietnamese
  • Welsh
  • Xhosa
  • Yiddish
  • Yoruba
  • Zulu

Abstract

Estimation of computer model parameters using field data is sometimes attempted while simultaneously allowing for model bias. One paper reports that simultaneous estimation of a bias vector and a scalar calibration parameter, which results in a “calibrated computer model,” can be sensitive to assumptions made prior to data collection. Other papers show that “calibrated computer models” can lead to improved response prediction, as measured by the root mean squared prediction error (RMSE). This paper uses a simulated case study to show that the RMSE from a purely empirical prediction option (local kernel smoothing) can be smaller than the RMSE from a “calibrated computer model” option. Therefore, although we endorse “calibrated computer models,” we point out that purely empirical models can provide competitive predictions in some cases.

References

17 Cites in Article
  1. M Aitken (2010). The Integrated Bayes/Likelihood Approach.
  2. J Bayarri,J Berger,R Paulo,J Sacks,J Cafeo,J Cavendish,C Lin,J Tu (2007). A framework for validation of computer models.
  3. T Burr,M Hamada,N Hengartner (2011). Impact of spectral smoothing on gamma radiation portal alarm probabilities.
  4. T Burr,N Hengartner,E Matzner-Lober,S Myers,L Rouviere (2010). Smoothing Low Resolution Gamma Spectra.
  5. T Burr,M Hamada (2012). Simultaneous Estimation of Computer Model Parameters and Model Bias, to appear.
  6. P Cornillon,N Hengartner,E Matzner-Lober (2011). Iterative bias reduction in multivariate smoothing in R: the ibr package.
  7. C Geyer (2009). MCMC Package Example Version 0.
  8. Trevor Hastie,Jerome Friedman,Robert Tibshirani (2001). The Elements of Statistical Learning.
  9. Dave Higdon,James Gattiker,Brian Williams,Maria Rightley (2008). Computer Model Calibration Using High-Dimensional Output.
  10. K Myers,D Higdon,J Gattiker (2008). A detailed example of using the Gaussian process model for simulation analysis (GPM/SA) code.
  11. T Oden,R Moser,O Ghattas (2010). Computer predictions with quantified uncertainty, Part I.
  12. (2004). R: a language and environment for statistical computing.
  13. C Unal,B Williams,F Hemez,S Atamturkur,P Mcclure (2011). Improved best estimate plus uncertainty methodology, including advanced validation concepts, to license evolving nuclear reactors.
  14. O Vanli,Chuck Zhang,Li‐jen Chen,Kan Wang,Ben Wang (2010). A Bayesian approach for integration of physical and computer experiments for quality improvement in nano‐composite manufacturing.
  15. W Venables,B Ripley (1999). Modern applied statistics with S-plus.
  16. S Wang,W Chen,K Tsui (2009). Bayesian validation of computer models.
  17. B Williams,R Picard,L Swiler (2011). Multiple model inference with applications to model selection for the reactor code R7.

Funding

No external funding was declared for this work.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

No ethics committee approval was required for this article type.

Data Availability

Not applicable for this article.

How to Cite This Article

Dr. Tom Burr. 2012. \u201cCase Study in Combining Physical and Computer Experiments\u201d. Global Journal of Science Frontier Research - A: Physics & Space Science GJSFR-A Volume 12 (GJSFR Volume 12 Issue A3): .

Download Citation

Journal Specifications

Crossref Journal DOI 10.17406/GJSFR

Print ISSN 0975-5896

e-ISSN 2249-4626

Version of record

v1.2

Issue date

April 7, 2012

Language
en
Experiance in AR

Explore published articles in an immersive Augmented Reality environment. Our platform converts research papers into interactive 3D books, allowing readers to view and interact with content using AR and VR compatible devices.

Read in 3D

Your published article is automatically converted into a realistic 3D book. Flip through pages and read research papers in a more engaging and interactive format.

Article Matrices
Total Views: 5435
Total Downloads: 2676
2026 Trends
Related Research

Published Article

Estimation of computer model parameters using field data is sometimes attempted while simultaneously allowing for model bias. One paper reports that simultaneous estimation of a bias vector and a scalar calibration parameter, which results in a “calibrated computer model,” can be sensitive to assumptions made prior to data collection. Other papers show that “calibrated computer models” can lead to improved response prediction, as measured by the root mean squared prediction error (RMSE). This paper uses a simulated case study to show that the RMSE from a purely empirical prediction option (local kernel smoothing) can be smaller than the RMSE from a “calibrated computer model” option. Therefore, although we endorse “calibrated computer models,” we point out that purely empirical models can provide competitive predictions in some cases.

Our website is actively being updated, and changes may occur frequently. Please clear your browser cache if needed. For feedback or error reporting, please email [email protected]

Request Access

Please fill out the form below to request access to this research paper. Your request will be reviewed by the editorial or author team.
X

Quote and Order Details

Contact Person

Invoice Address

Notes or Comments

This is the heading

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

High-quality academic research articles on global topics and journals.

Case Study in Combining Physical and Computer Experiments

Dr. Tom Burr
Dr. Tom Burr Los Alamos National Laboratory
Michael S. Hamada
Michael S. Hamada

Research Journals