14
2014 SIAM Conference on Uncertainty Quantification MS42: e Reliability of Computational Research Findings: Reproducible Research, Uncertainty Quantification, and Verification & Validation Prof. Lorena A. Barba Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department, George Washington University Twitter: @LorenaABarba 1 About me 2 http://lorenabarba.com Not an expert in UQ 3 Uncertainty Quantification Reproducible Science Validation & Verification 4

Barba Siam Uq Apr22014 SIAM Conference on Uncertainty Quantification

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

2014 SIAM Conference on Uncertainty QuantificationMS42: Reliability of Computational Research Findings: Reproducible Research, Uncertainty Quantification, andVerification & Validation

Citation preview

2014 SIAM Conference on Uncertainty Quantification

MS42:!e Reliability of Computational Research Findings: Reproducible Research, Uncertainty Quantification, and Verification & Validation

Prof. Lorena A. BarbaMechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department, George Washington University

Twitter: @LorenaABarba

1

About me

2

http://lorenabarba.com

Not an expert in UQ

3

Uncertainty Quantification

Reproducible Science

Validation & Verification

4

5 6

7

Can UQ make “irreproducible” large-scale simulations reliable?

8

Why does it matter?Computer simulations create scientific knowledge.

9

SocrativeGo to:

http://m.socrative.com

‣ Room number : 75443

10

True/False?Computer simulations create scientific knowledge.

11 12

True/False?Simulation is a method.

13 14

When do we have evidence that claims to knowledge from simulation are justified?

E. Winsberg, “Science in the Age of Computer Simulation” (2010)

15

!e Method of computer simulation

‣ Same as von Neumann et al. in 1945

Mathematical Model

Start:

Transform into Algorithm ComputeProblem we can’t solve

16

!e Method of computer simulation

‣ Same as von Neumann et al. in 1945

Mathematical Model

Start:

Transform into Algorithm ComputeProblem we can’t solve

Already trusted

16

!e Method of computer simulation

‣ Same as von Neumann et al. in 1945

Transform into Algorithm ComputeMathematical

Model

Start:

Problem we can’t solve

17

!e Method of computer simulation

‣ Same as von Neumann et al. in 1945

Transform into Algorithm Compute

Discretize the equations:...what if accuracy demands a grid that is too fine to compute?

17

!e Method of computer simulation

Deviates from the mathematical model to make it computable:

‣ Simplifying assumptions— symmetry, ignoring variables

‣Add elements that are not in the original equations, e.g., eddy viscosity, cloud models

‣What if the initial algorithm is unstable?

Transform into Algorithm

Mathematical Model

Problem we can’t compute

18

True/False?A reproducible simulation does not need to be accurate.

19 20

True/FalseIs there value to a Reproducible Wrong Answer?

(If yes, V&V and Reproducibility are distinct.)

21 22

Validation & Verification

‣Validation — confirm that the simulation parallels the physics we want to study

‣Verification — confirm that the simulation results match the solutions to the mathematical model

23

Validation & Verification

‣Validation — confirm that the simulation parallels the physics we want to study

‣Verification — confirm that the simulation results match the solutions to the mathematical model

Fitness of the model

Fitness of the solver

23

Validation & Verification

‣Validation — confirm that the simulation parallels the physics we want to study

‣Verification — confirm that the simulation results match the solutions to the mathematical model

(Can these really be divided neatly?)

Fitness of the model

Fitness of the solver

23

How do we show evidence that a simulation gives reliable data about the real world?

24

How do we come to rationally believe in an experimental result?

A. Franklin, “!e Neglect of Experiment” (1986)

25

True/False?Simulation is an experiment.

26

27

Not so neat as V&V

‣What about comparisons with other simulations?

‣What is the role of visualization? data interpretation? analysis?

‣And all the judgements in between ...

Important for Reproducibility!

28

Not so neat as V&V

‣What about comparisons with other simulations?

‣What is the role of visualization? data interpretation? analysis?

‣And all the judgements in between ...

Important for Reproducibility!

V&V --> trust the simulation resultsR --> trust the science results? trust the scientist?

28

True/FalseIs V&V a pre-requisite to Reproducibility?

29

30

Confidence in results ...

‣mathematical rigor needed, but not enough!

‣ involves physical intuition

‣ often relies in visualizations

‣ requires skilled judgement

‣ value questions

31

True/FalseUQ aims to give objective confidence levels for the results of simulations.

32 33

True/FalseIs V&V a pre-requisite to UQ?

34 35

True/FalseUQ presupposes verification and informs validation.

36 37

True/FalseVerification should be done before validation.

38 39

True/FalseIn verification, the actual value of the error is generally unknown.

40 41

Uncertainty Quantification

Reproducible Science

Validation & Verification

?

42

True/FalseCan reproducible science be uncertain?

43

44

Repeatability & Reproducibility

‣ Repeatability — ability to re-run the same experiment with the same method on the same syste, and obtain the same/similar results

‣ Reproducibility — ability to independently confirm a scientific hypothesis via reproduction of published work

Vitek & Kalibera, “R3—Repeatability, Reproducibility, Rigor” (2011)

45

True/FalseUQ is a requirement of reproducibility.

46 47

My conclusion

My Reproducibility PI Manifesto [*] is incomplete. Making code/data open and publicly available is not all, we need to publish our uncertainties, our judgements.

Lorena A. Barba

[*] http://lorenabarba.com/gallery/reproducibility-pi-manifesto/

Twitter: @LorenaABarba

48 49