Abstract
A growing area of focus is using multi-fidelity(MF) simulations to predict the behavior of complex physical systems. In order to adequately utilize the popular sequential designs to improve the effectiveness of the MF method, two challenges involving good projection properties in the presence of effect sparsity and the sample allocation between the high-fidelity(HF) and low-fidelity (LF) codes remain to be addressed. Unfortunately, no systematic study has hitherto been done to deal with these two key issues simultaneously. This article develops a sequential nested design for MF experiments that pays attention to both the space-filling properties in all subsets of factors and the best combination between the two levels of accuracy. For the first issue, we propose a weighted maximum projection criterion combining the uniformity metrics of the HF and LF experiments to select HF points, where the weights are totally data-driven. Note that the obtained HF data is also executed in LF codes to form a nested structure. On the other hand, those samples that only appear in the LF simulation are obtained by the original maximum projection design. The second issue is directly connected with deciding which code to run in the next iteration. We use the entropy theory to score the execution of fidelity for each version, such that the one who has a greater potential to improve the model accuracy will be selected. The performance of the proposed approach is illustrated through several numerical examples. The results demonstrate that the proposed approach outperforms the other three methods in terms of both the prediction accuracy of the final surrogate model and the uniformity in all subspaces of the two codes.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Chen H, Zhang Y, Yang X (2020) Uniform projection nested Latin hypercube designs. Stat Pap 62(4):2031–2045. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00362-020-01172-6
Fernández-Godino MG, Park C, Kim NH, Haftka RT (2019) Issues in deciding whether to use multifidelity surrogates. AIAA J 57(5):2039–2054. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.j057750
Gahrooei MR, Paynabar K, Pacella M, Colosimo BM (2019) An adaptive fused sampling approach of high-accuracy data in the presence of low-accuracy data. IISE Trans 51(11):1251–1264. https://doi.org/10.1080/24725854.2018.1540901
Goodall P, Sharpe R, West A (2019) A data-driven simulation to support remanufacturing operations. Comput Ind 105:48–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2018.11.001
Gratiet LL, Cannamela C (2015) Cokriging-based sequential design strategies using fast cross-validation techniques for multi-fidelity computer codes. Technometrics 57(3):418–427. https://doi.org/10.1080/00401706.2014.928233
Hebbal A, Brevault L, Balesdent M, Talbi E-G, Melab N (2021) Multi-fidelity modeling with different input domain definitions using deep gaussian processes. Struct Multidiscip Optim 63(5):2267–2288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-020-02802-1
Joseph VR, Gul E, Ba S (2015) Maximum projection designs for computer experiments. Biometrika 102(2):371–380. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/asv002
Kennedy M, O’Hagan (2000) Predicting the output from a complex computer code when fast approximations are available. Biometrika 87(1):1–13. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/87.1.1
Li Z, Tan MHY (2021) A gaussian process emulator based approach for Bayesian calibration of a functional input. Technometrics. https://doi.org/10.1080/00401706.2021.1971567
Li X, Wang X, Xiong S (2021) A sequential design strategy for integrating low-accuracy and high-accuracy computer experiments. Commun Stat. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610918.2020.1870692
Mu W, Xiong S (2018) A class of space-filling designs and their projection properties. Stat Probab Lett 141:129–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spl.2018.06.002
Ouyang L, Han M, Ma Y, Wang M, Park C (2022) Simulation optimization using stochastic kriging with robust statistics. J Oper Res Soc. https://doi.org/10.1080/01605682.2022.2055498
Park J, Reveliotis SA, Bodner DA, Zhou C, Wu J, McGinnis LF (2001) High-fidelity rapid prototyping of 300 mm fabs through discrete event system modeling. Comput Ind 45(1):79–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0166-3615(01)00082-3
Park C, Haftka RT, Kim NH (2016) Remarks on multi-fidelity surrogates. Struct Multidiscip Optim 55(3):1029–1050. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-016-1550-y
Poloczek M, Wang J, Frazier P (2017) Multi-information source optimization. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1603.00389
Qian PZG (2009) Nested Latin hypercube designs. Biometrika 96(4):957–970. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/asp045
Qian PZG, Wu CFJ (2008) Bayesian hierarchical modeling for integrating low-accuracy and high-accuracy experiments. Technometrics 50(2):192–204. https://doi.org/10.1198/004017008000000082
Qian Z, Seepersad CC, Joseph VR, Allen JK, Wu CFJ (2006) Building surrogate models based on detailed and approximate simulations. J Mech Des 128(4):668–677. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2179459
Sacks J, Schiller SB, Welch WJ (1989) Designs for computer experiments. Technometrics 31(1):41–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/00401706.1989.10488474
Santner TJ, Williams BJ, Notz WI (2003) The design and analysis of computer experiments. Springer, New York
Shang B, Apley DW (2020) Fully-sequential space-filling design algorithms for computer experiments. J Qual Technol 53(2):173–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224065.2019.1705207
Sheng C, Tan MHY, Zou L (2020) Maximum expected entropy transformed Latin hypercube designs. J Appl Stat 48(12):2152–2177. https://doi.org/10.1080/02664763.2020.1786674
Shewry MC, Wynn HP (1987) Maximum entropy sampling. J Appl Stat 14(2):165–170. https://doi.org/10.1080/02664768700000020
Sobester KF (2008) Engineering design via surrogate modelling: a practical guide. Wiley, New York
Sun F, Wang Y, Xu H (2019) Uniform projection designs. Ann Stat. https://doi.org/10.1214/18-aos1705
Wu CFJ, Hamada M (2009) Experiments. Plan Anal Optim. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119470007
Xia H, Ding Y, Mallick BK (2011) Bayesian hierarchical model for combining misaligned two-resolution metrology data. IIE Trans 43(4):242–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/0740817x.2010.521804
Xiong S, Qian PZG, Wu CFJ (2013) Sequential design and analysis of high-accuracy and low-accuracy computer codes. Technometrics 55(1):37–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/00401706.2012.723572
Zhou Q, Wang Y, Choi S-K, Jiang P, Shao X, Hu J (2017) A sequential multi-fidelity metamodeling approach for data regression. Knowl-Based Syst 134:199–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2017.07.033
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 71931006, 71871119, 72072089) and Jiangsu Funding Program for Excellent Postdoctoral Talent (No. 2022ZB259).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this article.
Replication of results
The main codes are submitted as supplementary materials to help readers understand better.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Chen, H., Ouyang, L., Liu, L. et al. Sequential design of multi-fidelity computer experiments with effect sparsity. Stat Papers 64, 2057–2080 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00362-022-01370-4
Received:
Revised:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00362-022-01370-4