A transport-based multifidelity preconditioner for Markov chain Monte Carlo

  • Benjamin PeherstorferEmail author
  • Youssef Marzouk
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Model reduction of parametrized Systems


Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) sampling of posterior distributions arising in Bayesian inverse problems is challenging when evaluations of the forward model are computationally expensive. Replacing the forward model with a low-cost, low-fidelity model often significantly reduces computational cost; however, employing a low-fidelity model alone means that the stationary distribution of the MCMC chain is the posterior distribution corresponding to the low-fidelity model, rather than the original posterior distribution corresponding to the high-fidelity model. We propose a multifidelity approach that combines, rather than replaces, the high-fidelity model with a low-fidelity model. First, the low-fidelity model is used to construct a transport map that deterministically couples a reference Gaussian distribution with an approximation of the low-fidelity posterior. Then, the high-fidelity posterior distribution is explored using a non-Gaussian proposal distribution derived from the transport map. This multifidelity “preconditioned” MCMC approach seeks efficient sampling via a proposal that is explicitly tailored to the posterior at hand and that is constructed efficiently with the low-fidelity model. By relying on the low-fidelity model only to construct the proposal distribution, our approach guarantees that the stationary distribution of the MCMC chain is the high-fidelity posterior. In our numerical examples, our multifidelity approach achieves significant speedups compared with single-fidelity MCMC sampling methods.


Bayesian inverse problems Transport maps Multifidelity Model reduction Markov chain Monte Carlo 

Mathematics Subject Classification (2010)

65C05 65C40 65C60 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



  1. 1.
    Allaire, D., Willcox, K.: A mathematical and computational framework for multifidelity design and analysis with computer models. Int. J. Uncertain. Quantif. 4(1), 1–20 (2014)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Balakrishnan, S., Roy, A., Ierapetritou, M.G., Flach, G.P., Georgopoulos, P.G.: Uncertainty reduction and characterization for complex environmental fate and transport models: an empirical Bayesian framework incorporating the stochastic response surface method. Water Resour. Res. 39(12), 1–13 (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Benner, P., Gugercin, S., Willcox, K.: A survey of projection-based model reduction methods for parametric dynamical systems. SIAM Rev. 57(4), 483–531 (2015)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Beskos, A., Jasra, A., Law, K., Tempone, R., Zhou, Y.: Multilevel sequential Monte Carlo samplers. Stochastic Processes and their Applications 127 (5), 1417–1440 (2017)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bigoni, D., Spantini, A., Morrison, R., Baptista, R.M.: Documentation of TransportMaps software package. Tech. rep., Uncertainty Quantification Group, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (2018)
  6. 6.
    Bonnotte, N.: From Knothe’s rearrangement to Brenier’s optimal transport map. SIAM J. Math. Anal. 45(1), 64–87 (2013)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Boyaval, S.: A fast Monte–Carlo method with a reduced basis of control variates applied to uncertainty propagation and Bayesian estimation. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 241–244, 190–205 (2012)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Boyaval, S., Lelièvre, T.: A variance reduction method for parametrized stochastic differential equations using the reduced basis paradigm. Commun. Math. Sci. 8(3), 735–762 (2010)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brooks, S., Gelman, A., Jones, G.L., Meng, X.L.: Handbook of Markov Chain Monte Carlo. Chapman and Hall/CRC, London (2011)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bungartz, H.J., Griebel, M.: Sparse grids. Acta Numerica 13, 147–269 (2004)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Carlier, G., Galichon, A., Santambrogio, F.: From Knothe’s transport to Brenier’s map and a continuation method for optimal transport. SIAM J. Math. Anal. 41(6), 2554–2576 (2010)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chen, P., Quarteroni, A.: Accurate and efficient evaluation of failure probability for partial different equations with random input data. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 267, 233–260 (2013)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chen, P., Quarteroni, A., Rozza, G.: Reduced basis methods for uncertainty quantification. SIAM/ASA J. Uncertain. Quantif. 5(1), 813–869 (2017)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chen, P., Schwab, C.: Sparse-grid, reduced-basis Bayesian inversion. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 297, 84–115 (2015)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Christen, J.A., Fox, C.: Markov chain Monte Carlo using an approximation. J. Comput. Graph. Stat. 14(4), 795–810 (2005)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Conrad, P., Davis, A., Marzouk, Y., Pillai, N., Smith, A.: Parallel local approximation MCMC for expensive models. SIAM/ASA J. Uncertain. Quantif. 6 (1), 339–373 (2018)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Conrad, P.R., Marzouk, Y., Pillai, N.S., Smith, A.: Accelerating asymptotically exact MCMC for computationally intensive models via local approximations. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 111(516), 1591–1607 (2016)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cortes, C., Vapnik, V.: Support-vector networks. Mach. Learn. 20(3), 273–297 (1995)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cotter, S., Dashti, M., Stuart, A.: Approximation of Bayesian inverse problems for PDEs. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 48(1), 322–345 (2010)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cui, T., Marzouk, Y., Willcox, K.: Data-driven model reduction for the Bayesian solution of inverse problems. Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 102(5), 966–990 (2015)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dodwell, T.J., Ketelsen, C., Scheichl, R., Teckentrup, A.L.: A hierarchical multilevel Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithm with applications to uncertainty quantification in subsurface flow. SIAM/ASA J. Uncertain. Quantif. 3 (1), 1075–1108 (2015)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Drohmann, M., Carlberg, K.: The ROMES method for statistical modeling of reduced-order-model error. SIAM/ASA J. Uncertain. Quantif. 3(1), 116–145 (2015)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Efendiev, Y., Hou, T., Luo, W.: Preconditioning Markov chain Monte Carlo simulations using coarse-scale models. SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 28(2), 776–803 (2006)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Eldred, M.S., Ng, L.W.T., Barone, M.F., Domino, S.P.: Multifidelity uncertainty quantification using spectral stochastic discrepancy models. In: Ghanem, R., Higdon, D., Owhadi, H. (eds.) Handbook of Uncertainty Quantification, pp 1–45. Springer, Cham (2016)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Forrester, A.I.J., Keane, A.J.: Recent advances in surrogate-based optimization. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 45(1–3), 50–79 (2009)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Frangos, M., Marzouk, Y., Willcox, K., van Bloemen Waanders, B.: Surrogate and Reduced-Order Modeling: a Comparison of Approaches for Large-Scale Statistical Inverse Problems, pp 123–149. Wiley, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gilks, W.R., Richardson, S., Spiegelhalter, D.J.: Markov Chain Monte Carlo in Practice. Chapman & Hall, London (1996)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gugercin, S., Antoulas, A.: A survey of model reduction by balanced truncation and some new results. Int. J. Control. 77(8), 748–766 (2004)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Haario, H., Laine, M., Mira, A., Saksman, E.: DRAM: efficient adaptive MCMC. Stat. Comput. 16(4), 339–354 (2006)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Haario, H., Saksman, E., Tamminen, J.: An adaptive Metropolis algorithm. Bernoulli 7(2), 223–242 (2001)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kaipio, J., Somersalo, E.: Statistical and Computational Inverse Problems. Springer, Berlin (2005)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Latz, J., Papaioannou, I., Ullmann, E.: Multilevel sequential2 Monte Carlo for Bayesian inverse problems. J. Comput. Phys. 368, 154–178 (2018)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Li, J., Marzouk, Y.: Adaptive construction of surrogates for the Bayesian solution of inverse problems. SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 36(3), A1163–A1186 (2014)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lieberman, C., Willcox, K., Ghattas, O.: Parameter and state model reduction for large-scale statistical inverse problems. SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 32(5), 2523–2542 (2010)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Liu, J.S.: Monte Carlo Strategies in Scientific Computing. Springer, Berlin (2008)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Manzoni, A., Pagani, S., Lassila, T.: Accurate solution of Bayesian inverse uncertainty quantification problems combining reduced basis methods and reduction error models. SIAM/ASA J. Uncertain. Quantif. 4(1), 380–412 (2016)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Marzouk, Y., Moselhy, T., Parno, M., Spantini, A.: Sampling via measure transport: an introduction. In: Ghanem, R., Higdon, D., Owhadi, H. (eds.) Handbook of Uncertainty Quantification, pp 1–41. Springer, Cham (2016)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Marzouk, Y., Najm, H.N.: Dimensionality reduction and polynomial chaos acceleration of Bayesian inference in inverse problems. J. Comput. Phys. 228(6), 1862–1902 (2009)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Marzouk, Y., Najm, H.N., Rahn, L.A.: Stochastic spectral methods for efficient Bayesian solution of inverse problems. J. Comput. Phys. 224(2), 560–586 (2007)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Marzouk, Y., Xiu, D.: A stochastic collocation approach to Bayesian inference in inverse problems. Commun. Comput. Phys. 6, 826–847 (2009)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Moselhy, T.A.E., Marzouk, Y.: Bayesian inference with optimal maps. J. Comput. Phys. 231(23), 7815–7850 (2012)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Ng, L., Willcox, K.: Multifidelity approaches for optimization under uncertainty. Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 100(10), 746–772 (2014)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Ng, L., Willcox, K.: Monte-carlo information-reuse approach to aircraft conceptual design optimization under uncertainty. J. Aircr., 1–12 (2015)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Parno, M.: Transport maps for accelerated Bayesian computation. Ph.D. thesis Massachusetts Institute of Technology (2015)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Parno, M., Marzouk, Y.: Transport map accelerated Markov chain Monte Carlo. SIAM/ASA J. Uncertain. Quantif. 6(2), 645–682 (2018)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Peherstorfer, B.: Multifidelity Monte Carlo estimation with adaptive low-fidelity models. SIAM/ASA J. Uncertain. Quantif. (accepted) (2019)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Peherstorfer, B., Cui, T., Marzouk, Y., Willcox, K.: Multifidelity importance sampling. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 300, 490–509 (2016)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Peherstorfer, B., Kramer, B., Willcox, K.: Multifidelity preconditioning of the cross-entropy method for rare event simulation and failure probability estimation. SIAM/ASA J. Uncertain. Quantif. 6(2), 737–761 (2018)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Peherstorfer, B., Willcox, K., Gunzburger, M.: Optimal model management for multifidelity Monte Carlo estimation. SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 38(5), A3163–A3194 (2016)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Peherstorfer, B., Willcox, K., Gunzburger, M.: Survey of multifidelity methods in uncertainty propagation, inference, and optimization. SIAM Rev. (2018)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Pflüger, D., Peherstorfer, B., Bungartz, H.: Spatially adaptive sparse grids for high-dimensional data-driven problems. J. Complex. 26(5), 508–522 (2010)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Qian, E., Peherstorfer, B., O’Malley, D., Vesselinov, V.V., Willcox, K.: Multifidelity Monte Carlo estimation of variance and sensitivity indices. SIAM/ASA J. Uncertain. Quantif. 6(2), 683–706 (2018)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Robert, C.P., Casella, G.: Monte Carlo Statistical Methods. Springer, Berlin (2004)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Roberts, G.O., Rosenthal, J.S.: Examples of adaptive MCMC. J. Comput. Graph. Stat. 18(2), 349–367 (2009)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Rosenblatt, M.: Remarks on a multivariate transformation. Ann. Math. Statist. 23(3), 470–472 (1952)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Rozza, G., Huynh, D., Patera, A.: Reduced basis approximation and a posteriori error estimation for affinely parametrized elliptic coercive partial differential equations. Arch. Comput. Meth. Eng. 15(3), 1–47 (2007)Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Santin, G., Wittwar, D., Haasdonk, B.: Greedy regularized kernel interpolation. arXiv:1807.09575 (2018)
  58. 58.
    Sirovich, L.: Turbulence and the dynamics of coherent structures. Q. Appl. Math. 45, 561–571 (1987)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Spall, J.: Introduction to Stochastic Search and Optimization, Estimation, Simulation, and Control. Wiley, New York (2003)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Spantini, A.: On the low-dimensional structure of Bayesian inference. Ph.D. thesis Massachusetts Institute of Technology (2017)Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Spantini, A., Bigoni, D., Marzouk, Y.: Inference via low-dimensional couplings. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 19(66), 1–71 (2018)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Stuart, A.M.: Inverse problems: a Bayesian perspective. Acta Numerica 19, 451–559 (2010)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Tarantola, A.: Inverse Problem Theory. Elsevier, Amsterdam (1987)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Tierney, L.: Markov chains for exploring posterior distributions. Ann. Statist. 22(4), 1701–1728 (1994)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Vapnik, V.: Statistical Learning Theory. Wiley, New York (1998)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Vershik, A.M.: Long history of the Monge-Kantorovich transportation problem. Math. Intell. 35(4), 1–9 (2013)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Villani, C.: Topics in optimal transportation. American Mathematical Society (2003)Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Villani, C.: Optimal Transport: Old and New. Springer, Berlin (2009)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Wang, J., Zabaras, N.: Using Bayesian statistics in the estimation of heat source in radiation. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 48(1), 15–29 (2005)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Wirtz, D., Haasdonk, B.: A vectorial kernel orthogonal greedy algorithm. Dolomites Research Notes on Approximation 6, 83–100 (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Courant Institute of Mathematical SciencesNew York UniversityNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations