Advertisement

Encapsulated PGD Algebraic Toolbox Operating with High-Dimensional Data

  • P. DíezEmail author
  • S. Zlotnik
  • A. García-González
  • A. Huerta
Original Paper

Abstract

In its original conception, proper generalized decomposition (PGD) provides explicit parametric solutions, denoted as computational vademecums or digital abacuses, to parametric boundary value problems. The PGD approach is extended here to devise a set of algebraic tools enabling to operate with multidimensional tensor data. These tools are designed to store, compress and perform basic operations (in particular divisions) with tensors in separable format. These tools are directly producing the computational vademecums for the resulting high-dimensional tensor data. Thus, the general methodology enables performing nontrivial operations (storage, compression, division, solving linear systems of equations...) for multidimensional tensor data. The idea is based on the principle of the PGD separation, that produces a separable least squares approximation of any multidimensional function. The PGD compression is a particular case, extensively used in practice to compact the separable solution without loss of accuracy. Here, this concept is applied to algebraic tensor structures that are also seen as functions in multidimensional Cartesian domains. Moreover, a straightforward extension of this concept is devised to operate with multidimensional objects stored in the separable format. That allows creating a toolbox of PGD arithmetic operators that is publicly released at https://git.lacan.upc.edu/zlotnik/algebraicPGDtools. Numerical tests demonstrate the performance and efficiency of the toolbox, both for tensor data handling and operation and also in applications pertaining to the discretized version of boundary value problems.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work is partially funded by Generalitat de Catalunya (Grant No. 1278 SGR 2017-2019) and Ministerio de Economía y Empresa and Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades (Grant No. DPI2017-85139-C2-2-R).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Beylkin G, Mohlenkamp MJ (2002) Numerical operator calculus in higher dimensions. Proc Nal Acad Sci 99(16):10246–10251MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beylkin G, Mohlenkamp MJ (2005) Algorithms for numerical analysis in high dimensions. SIAM J Sci Comput 26(6):2133–2159MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Borzacchiello D, Chinesta F, Malik M, García-Blanco R, Díez P (2016) Unified formulation of a family of iterative solvers for power systems analysis. Electr Power Syst Res 140:201–208.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsr.2016.06.021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chinesta F, Keunings R, Leygue A (2014) The proper generalized decomposition for advanced numerical simulations. A primer. Springer briefs in applied sciences and technology. Springer, Cham.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02865-1 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chinesta F, Leygue A, Bordeu F, Aguado JV, Cueto E, González D, Alfaro I, Ammar A, Huerta A (2013) PGD-based computational vademecum for efficient design, optimization and control. Arch Comput Methods Eng 20:31–59.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-013-9080-x MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Díez P, Zlotnik S, García-González A, Huerta A (2018) Algebraic PGD for tensor separation and compression: an algorithmic approach. C R Mécanique 346(7):501–5014.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crme.2018.04.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Doostan A, Iaccarino G (2009) A least-squares approximation of partial differential equations with high-dimensional random inputs. J Comput Phys 228(12):4332–4345MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Espig M, Hackbusch W, Litvinenko A, Matthies HG, Zander E (2012) Efficient analysis of high dimensional data in tensor formats. In: Garcke J, Griebel M (eds) Sparse grids and applications, vol 88. Lecture notes in computational science and engineering. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 31–56.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31703-3_2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fay TH (1989) The butterfly curve. Am Math Mon 96:442–443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    García-Blanco R, Borzacchiello D, Chinesta F, Díez P (2017) Monitoring a PGD solver for parametric power flow problems with goal-oriented error assessment. Int J Numer Methods Eng 111:529–552.  https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.5470 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    García-Blanco R, Díez P, Borzacchiello D, Chinesta F (2017) Algebraic and parametric solvers for the power flow problem: towards real-time and accuracy-guaranteed simulation of electric systems. Arch Comput Methods Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-017-9223-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Grasedyck L, Kressner D, Tobler C (2013) A literature survey of low-rank tensor approximation techniques. GAMM-Mitteilungen 36(1):53–78MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kolda T, Bader B (2009) Tensor decompositions and applications. SIAM Rev 51:455–500MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Modesto D, Zlotnik S, Huerta A (2015) Proper generalized decomposition for parameterized Helmholtz problems in heterogeneous and unbounded domains: application to harbor agitation. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 295:127–149.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2015.03.026 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nouy A (2017) Low-rank tensor methods for model order reduction. In: Ghanem R, Higdon D, Owhadi H (eds) Handbook of uncertainty quantification. Springer, Cham.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12385-1_21 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Oseledets IV (2011) Tensor-train decomposition. SIAM J Sci Comput 33(5):2295–2317MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rozza G (2014) Fundamentals of reduced basis method for problems governed by parametrized PDEs and applications. In: Chinesta F, Ladevèze P (eds) Separated representations and pgd-based model reduction. CISM international centre for mechanical sciences, vol 554. Springer, Vienna, pp 153–227.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-1794-1_4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sibileau A, García-González A, Auricchio F, Morganti S, Díez P (2018) Explicit parametric solutions of lattice structures with proper generalized decomposition (PGD): applications to the design of 3D-printed architectured materials. Comput Mech 62(4):871–891.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00466-017-1534-9 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© CIMNE, Barcelona, Spain 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Laboratori de Càlcul Numèric, E.T.S. de Ingeniería de CaminosUniversitat Politècnica de CatalunyaBarcelonaSpain
  2. 2.International Centre for Numerical Methods in Engineering, CIMNEBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations