Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 24, Issue 31, pp 24284–24296 | Cite as

Coupled Monte Carlo simulation and Copula theory for uncertainty analysis of multiphase flow simulation models

Research Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:
  • 250 Downloads

Abstract

Simulation-optimization techniques are effective in identifying an optimal remediation strategy. Simulation models with uncertainty, primarily in the form of parameter uncertainty with different degrees of correlation, influence the reliability of the optimal remediation strategy. In this study, a coupled Monte Carlo simulation and Copula theory is proposed for uncertainty analysis of a simulation model when parameters are correlated. Using the self-adaptive weight particle swarm optimization Kriging method, a surrogate model was constructed to replace the simulation model and reduce the computational burden and time consumption resulting from repeated and multiple Monte Carlo simulations. The Akaike information criterion (AIC) and the Bayesian information criterion (BIC) were employed to identify whether the t Copula function or the Gaussian Copula is the optimal Copula function to match the relevant structure of the parameters. The results show that both the AIC and BIC values of the t Copula function are less than those of the Gaussian Copula function. This indicates that the t Copula function is the optimal function for matching the relevant structure of the parameters. The outputs of the simulation model when parameter correlation was considered and when it was ignored were compared. The results show that the amplitude of the fluctuation interval when parameter correlation was considered is less than the corresponding amplitude when parameter estimation was ignored. Moreover, it was demonstrated that considering the correlation among parameters is essential for uncertainty analysis of a simulation model, and the results of uncertainty analysis should be incorporated into the remediation strategy optimization process.

Keywords

Uncertainty analysis Copula theory Surrogate model DNAPL SAPSOKRG 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was financially supported by Project funded by China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (No. 2016 M602388), the National Key Research and Development Program of China (No. 2016YFC0402803-02), and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 41372237).

References

  1. Balesdent M, Morio J, Marzat J (2013) Kriging-based adaptive importance sampling algorithms for rare event estimation. Struct Saf 44:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boving TB, Grathwohl P (2001) Tracer diffusion coefficients in sedimentary rocks: correlation to porosity and hydraulic conductivity. J Contam Hydrol 53(1–2):85–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chai WY, Zhu Y, Hou ZQ (2008) The research of copula theoryin in financial risk management. IEEE Int Conf Mach Learn Cybern 3:1489–1493Google Scholar
  4. Chen Z, Huang GH (2003) Integrated subsurface model in gand risk assessment of petroleum-contaminated sites in western Canada. J Environ Eng 129(19):858–871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Coulon F, Orsi R, Turner C, Walton C, Daly P, Pollard SJT (2009) Understanding the fate and transport of petroleum hydrocarbons from coal tar within gasholders. Environ Int 35(2):248–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cui XY, Hu XB, Zeng Y (2017) A copula-based perturbation stochastic method for fiber-reinforced composite structures with correlations. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 322:351–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Delshad M, Pope GA, Sepehrnoori K (1996) A compositional simulator for modeling surfactant enhanced aquifer remediation, 1 formulation. J Contam Hydrol 23(4):303–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fan YR, Huang GH, Baetz BW, Li YP, Huang K, Li Z, Chen X, Xiong LH (2016a) Parameter uncertainty and temporal dynamics of sensitivity for hydrologic models: a hybrid sequential data assimilation and probabilistic collocation method. Environ Model Softw 86:30–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fan YR, Huang WW, Huang GH, Huang K, Li YP, Kong XM (2016b) Bivariate hydrologic risk analysis based on a coupled entropy-copula method for the xiangxi river in the three gorges reservoir area, china. Theor Appl Climatol 125(1–2):381–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fan YR, Huang GH, Baetz BW, Li YP, Huang K (2017) Development of a copula-based particle filter (coppf) approach for hydrologic data assimilation under consideration of parameter interdependence. Water Resour Res 53(6):4850–4875CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Forrester AIJ, Keane AJ (2009) Recent advances in surrogate-based optimization. Prog Aerosp Sci 45(1):50–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ghosh S (2010) Modelling bivariate rainfall distribution and generating bivariate correlated rainfall data in neighbouring meteorological subdivisions using copula. Hydrol Process 24:3558–3567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Goda K (2010) Statistical modeling of joint probability distribution using copula: application to peak and permanent displacement seismic demands. Struct Saf 32:112–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Haslauer CP, Guthke P, Bárdossy A, Sudicky EA (2012) Effects of non-gaussian copula-based hydraulic conductivity fields on macrodispersion. Water Resour Res 48(7):2360–2368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. He L, Huang GH, Lu HW, Zeng GM (2008) Optimization of surfactant-enhanced aquifer remediation for a laboratory BTEX system under parameter uncertainty. Environ Sci Technol 42(6):2009–2014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. He L, Huang GH, Lu HW (2010) A stochastic optimization model under modeling uncertainty and parameter certainty for groundwater remediation design-part 1. Model development. J Hazard Mater 176(1–3):521–526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hou ZY, Lu WX, Chu HB, Luo JN (2015) Selecting parameter-optimized surrogate models in DNAPL-contaminated aquifer remediation strategies. Environ Eng Sci 32(12):1016–1026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hou ZY, Lu WX, Chen M (2016) Surrogate-based sensitivity analysis and uncertainty analysis for dnapl-contaminated aquifer remediation. J Water Resour Plan Manag 142(11):04016043CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Janusevskis J, Le Riche R (2013) Simultaneous kriging-based estimation and optimization of mean response. J Glob Optim 55(2):313–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jiang C, Zhang W, Wang B, Han X (2014) Structure reliability analysis using a copula-function-based evidence theory model. Comput Struct 143:19–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jiang X, Lu WX, Hou ZY, Zhao HQ, Na J (2015) Ensemble of surrogates-based optimization for identifying an optimal surfactant-enhanced aquifer remediation strategy at heterogeneous DNAPL-contaminated sites. Comput Geosci 84:37–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lee JS, Kang SK (2007) GA based meta-modeling of BPN architecture for constrained approximate optimization. Int J Solids Struct 44:5980–5993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lee SH, Kim HY, Oh SI (2002) Cylindrical tube optimization using response surface method based on stochastic process. J Mater Process Technol 130:490–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lei L (2008) Empirical research on VaR model on Chinese stock market based on GJR-GARCH, FHS, CoPula & EVT. Dissertation, Jinan university. (In Chinese)Google Scholar
  25. Li YF, Ng SH, Xie M, Goh TN (2010) A systematic comparison of meta modeling techniques for simulation optimization in decision support systems. Appl Soft Comput 10(4):1257–1273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Li DQ, Tang XS, Zhou CB, Phoon KK (2012) Uncertainty analysis of correlated non-normal geotechnical parameters using Gaussian copula. Sci China Technol Sci 55(11):3081–3089CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Li DQ, Tang XS, Zhou CB (2014) Uncertainty characterization and reliability analysis of geotechnical parameters based on copula theory. Science press, Beijing (In Chinese)Google Scholar
  28. Li BQ, Liang ZM, He YQ, Hu L, Zhao WM, Acharya K (2017a) Comparison of parameter uncertainty analysis techniques for a topmodel application. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 31(5):1045–1059CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Li J, Lu HW, Xing F, Chen YZ (2017b) Human health risk constrained naphthalene-contaminated groundwater remediation management through an improved credibility method. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24:16120–16136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lu WX, Chu HB, Zhao Y, Luo JN (2013) Optimization of denser nonaqueous phase liquids-contaminated groundwater remediation based on kriging surrogate model. Water Pract Technol 8(2):304–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Luo JN, Lu WX (2014) Sobol’ sensitivity analysis of NAPL-contaminated aquifer remediation process based on multiple surrogates. Comput Geosci 67:110–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mason AR, Kueper BH (1996) Numerical simulation of surfactant flooding to remove pooled DNAPL from porous media. Environ Sci Technol 30(11):3205–3215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. McPhee J, Yeh WG (2006) Experimental design for groundwater modeling and management. Water Resour Res 42(2):336–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Morin RH (2006) Negative correlation between porosity and hydraulic conductivity in sand-and-gravel aquifers at cape cod, massachusetts, USA. J Hydrol 316(1–4):43–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Muff J, Mackinnon L, Durant ND, Bennedsen LF, Rügge K, Bondgaard M, Pennell K (2016) The influence of cosolvent and heat on the solubility and reactivity of organophosphorous pesticide DNAPL alkaline hydrolysis. Environ Sci Pollut Res 23(22):22658–22666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nelsen RB (2006) An introduction to copulas, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  37. Neuman SP, Xue L, Ye M, Lu D (2012) Bayesian analysis of data-worth considering model and parameter uncertainties. Adv Water Resour 36:75–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Nguyen AT, Reiter S, Rigo P (2014) A review on simulation-based optimization methods applied to building performance analysis. Appl Energy 113:1043–1058CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pan F, Zhu P (2011) Lightweight design of vehicle front-end structure: contributions of multiple surrogates. Int J Veh Des 57(2):124–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Possolo A (2010) Copulas for uncertainty analysis. Metrologia 47(3):262–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Qin XS, Huang GH, Chakma A, Chen B, Zeng GM (2007) Simulation-based process optimization for surfactant-enhanced aquifer remediation at heterogeneous DNAPL-contaminated sites. Sci Total Environ 381(1):17–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Qin XS, Huang GH, Zeng GM, Chakma A (2008) Simulation-based optimization of dual-phase vacuum extraction to remove nonaqueous phase liquids in subsurface. Water Resour Res 44(4):106–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Raza W, Kim KY (2007) Evaluation of surrogate models in optimization of wire-wrapped fuel assembly. J Nucl Sci Technol 44(6):819–822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rémillard B, Nasri B, Bouezmarni T (2017) On copula-based conditional quantile estimators. Stat Probabil Lett 128:14–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rukhin AL, Osmoukhina A (2005) Nonparametric measures of dependence for biometric data studies. J Stat Plan Infer 131(1):1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sakata S, Ashida F, Zako M (2003) Structural optimization using kriging approximation. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 192(7–8):923–939CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sepulveda N, Doherty J (2015) Uncertainty analysis of a groundwater flow model in east-Central Florida. Groundwater 53(3):464–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de répartition à $n$ dimensions etleursmarges. Publ Inst Stat Univ Paris 8:229–231Google Scholar
  49. Tang XS, Li DQ, Zhou CB, Zhang LM (2013) Bivariate distribution models using copulas for reliability analysis. J Risk Reliab 227(5):499–512Google Scholar
  50. Wong HS, Yeh WG (2002) Uncertainty analysis in contaminated aquifer management. J Water Resour Plan Manag 128(1):33–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wu B, Zheng Y, Tian Y, Wu X, Yao YY, Han F, Liu J, Zheng CM (2014) Systematic assessment of the uncertainty in integrated surface water-groundwater modeling based on the probabilistic collocation method. Water Resour Res 50(7):5848–5865CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Xu C, He HS, Hu Y, Yu C, Li X, Bu R (2005) Latin hypercube sampling and geostatistical modeling of spatial uncertainty in a spatially explicit forest landscape model simulation. Ecol Model 185(2):255–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Xu YP, Booij MJ, Tong YB (2010) Uncertainty analysis in statistical modeling of extreme hydrological events. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 24:567–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zhai J, Yin Q, Dong S (2017) Metocean design parameter estimation for fixed platform based on copula functions. J Ocean Univ China 16(4):635–648CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Zhang J, Chowdhury S, Mehmani A (2014) Characterizing uncertainty attributable to surrogate models. J Mech Des 136(3):252–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Zhao Y, Lu WX, Xiao CN (2016) A kriging surrogate model coupled in simulation–optimization approach for identifying release history of groundwater sources. J Contam Hydrol 185-186(Pt2):225–236Google Scholar
  57. Zheng Y, Han F (2016) Markov chain monte carlo (mcmc) uncertainty analysis for watershed water quality modeling and management. Stoch Env Res Risk A 30(1):293–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Zheng Y, Wang W, Han F, Ping J (2011) Uncertainty assessment for watershed water quality modeling: a probabilistic collocation method based approach. Adv Water Resour 34(7):887–898CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Biogeology and Environmental Geology and School of Environmental StudiesChina University of GeosciencesWuhanChina
  2. 2.Institute of Disaster Prevention Science and TechnologySanheChina
  3. 3.College of Environment and ResourcesJilin UniversityChangchunChina
  4. 4.Songliao Institute of Water Environment ScienceSongliao River Basin Water Resources Protection BureauChangchunChina

Personalised recommendations