Active learning with multifidelity modeling for efficient rare event simulation

• DOI: 10.1016/j.jcp.2022.111506
• Publication Date: 2022-07-30T03:15:48Z
• Authors: Somayajulu L.N. D...; Michael D. Shields; Benjamin W. Spencer; Chandrakanth Boli...; Andrew E. Slaughter; Vincent M. Labouré; Promit Chakroborty
• Keywords: FOS: Computer and information sciences; Computer Science - Machine Learning; Machine Learning (stat.ML); 02 engineering and technology; Statistics - Applications; 01 natural sciences; 0201 civil engineering; Machine Learning (cs.LG); Statistics - Machine Learning; 0103 physical sciences; Applications (stat.AP)

While multifidelity modeling provides a cost-effective way to conduct uncertainty quantification with computationally expensive models, much greater efficiency can be achieved by adaptively deciding the number of required high-fidelity (HF) simulations, depending on the type and complexity of the problem and the desired accuracy in the results. We propose a framework for active learning with multifidelity modeling emphasizing the efficient estimation of rare events. Our framework works by fusing a low-fidelity (LF) prediction with an HF-inferred correction, filtering the corrected LF prediction to decide whether to call the high-fidelity model, and for enhanced subsequent accuracy, adapting the correction for the LF prediction after every HF model call. The framework does not make any assumptions as to the LF model type or its correlations with the HF model. In addition, for improved robustness when estimating smaller failure probabilities, we propose using dynamic active learning functions that decide when to call the HF model. We demonstrate our framework using several academic case studies and two finite element (FE) model case studies: estimating Navier-Stokes velocities using the Stokes approximation and estimating stresses in a transversely isotropic model subjected to displacements via a coarsely meshed isotropic model. Across these case studies, not only did the proposed framework estimate the failure probabilities accurately, but compared with either Monte Carlo or a standard variance reduction method, it also required only a small fraction of the calls to the HF model.