Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis: Applications to large-scale systems

Sensitivity and Uncertainty Analysis: Applications to Large-Scale Systems

Volumn 2, Issue , 2005, Pages 1-367

  Cacuci, Dan G ^a   Ionescu Bujor, Mihaela ^a   Navon, Ionel Michael ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KARLSRUHE   (Germany)

^b FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84864493410     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Book

References (125)

1. Allen, D.M., The prediction sum of squares as a criterion for selecting predictor variables, Technical Report No. 23, Department of Statistics, University of Kentucky, Lexington, 1971.
2. Andres, T.H. and Hajas, W.C., Using iterated fractional factorial design to screen parameters in sensitivity analysis of a probabilistic risk assessment model; Proceedings of the Joint International Conference on Mathematical Methods and Supercomputing in Nuclear Applications, Vol.2, 328, 19-23 April 1993, Karlsruhe, Germany, 1993.
3. Archer, G., Saltelli, A. and Sobol’, I.M., Sensitivity measures, ANOVA like techniques and the use of bootstrap, J. Statist. Comput. Simul., 58, 99, 1997.
4. ASME Steam Tables, Thermodynamic and Transport Properties of Steam. 6th Edition, The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, 1993.
5. Baer, F. et al., Intercomparison of heating rates generated by global climate model longwave radiation codes, J. Geophys. Res., 101, 26589, 1996.
6. Berger, J., Statistical Decision Theory and Bayesian Analysis, 2nd ed., Springer Verlag, New York, 1985.
7. Bettonvil, B., Detection of Important Factors by Sequential Bifurcation, Tilburg University Press, Tilburg, 1990.
8. Bonano, E.J. and Apostolakis, G.E., Theoretical foundations and practical issues for using expert judgments in uncertainty analysis of high-level radioactive waste disposal, Radioactive Waste Manag. and Nucl. Fuel Cycle, 16, 137, 1991.
9. Box, G.E.P. and Draper, N.R., Empirical Model-Building and Response Surfaces, Wiley, New York, 1987.
10. Box, G.E.P., Hunter, W.G., and Hunter, J.S., Statistics for Experimenters, Chap.15, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1978.
11. Browning, G.L., Hack, J.J., and Swarztrauber, P.N., A comparison of 3 numerical methods for solving differential equations on the sphere, Mon. Wea. Rev., 117, 1058, 1989.
12. Bysveen, S. et al., Experience from application of probabilistic methods in Offshore field activities, in Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Off-shore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Saga Petroleum AS, Norway, 1990.
13. Cacuci, D.G., Sensitivity theory for nonlinear systems. I. Nonlinear functional analysis approach, J. Math. Phys., 22, 2794, 1981.
14. Cacuci, D.G., Sensitivity theory for nonlinear systems. II. Extensions to additonal classes of responses, J. Math. Phys., 22, 2803, 1981.
15. Cacuci, D.G., The forward and the adjoint methods of sensitivity analysis, in Uncertainty Analysis, Ronen, Y., Ed., CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 71, 1988.
16. Cacuci, D.G., Global optimization and sensitivity analysis, Nucl. Sci. Eng., 104, 78, 1990.
17. Cacuci, D.G., Sensitivity and Uncertainty Analysis: I. Theory, Vol. 1, Chapman & Hall/CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2003.
18. Cacuci, D.G. and Hall, M.C.G., Efficient estimation of feedback effects with application to climate models, J. Atmos. Sci., 41, 2063, 1984.
19. Cacuci, D.G. and Ionescu-Bujor, M., Adjoint sensitivity analysis of the RELAP5/MOD3.2 two-fluid thermal-hydraulic code system: I. Theory, Nucl. Sci. Eng., 136, 59, 2000.
20. Cacuci, D.G. and Ionescu-Bujor, M., Adjoint sensitivity and uncertainty analysis for reliability/availability models, with application to the International Fusion Materials Irradiation Facility, A&QT-R 2002 (THETA 13), International Conference on Automation, Quality and Testing, Robotics, May 23-25, 2002, Cluj-Napoca, Romania, 2002.
21. Cacuci, D.G., Maudlin, P.J., and Parks, C.V., Adjoint sensitivity analysis of extremum-type responses in reactor safety, Nucl. Sci. Eng., 83, 112, 1983.
22. Cacuci, D.G. and Wacholder, E., Adjoint sensitivity analysis for transient two-phase flow, Nucl. Sci. Eng., 82, 461, 1982.
23. Campana, K.A., Radiation and cloud parameterization at the National Meteorological Center, ECMWF Workshop on Clouds, Radiation, and the Hydrological Cycle, 1990.
24. Campana, K.A., Use of cloud analyses to validate and improve modeldiagnostic clouds at NMC, ECMWF Workshop on Modelling, Validation and Assimilation of Clouds, 1994.
25. Cess R.D., et al., Cloud feedback in atmospheric general circulation models: An update, J. Geophys. Res., 101, 12791, 1996.
26. Cess R.D. and Potter, G.L., Exploratory studies of the cloud radiative forcing with a general circulation model, Tellus 39(A), 460, 1987.
27. nd ed., John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1980.
28. Cotter, S.C., A screening design for factorial experiments with interactions, Biometrika, 66, 317, 1979.
29. Cowan, G., Statistical Data Analysis, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1998.
30. Cruz, J.B., System Sensitivity Analysis, Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross, Stroudsburg, PA, 1973.
31. Cukier, R.I. et al., Study of the sensitivity of coupled reaction systems to uncertainties in rate coefficients. I: Theory, J. Chem. Phys., 59, 3873, 1973.
32. Daniel, C., One-at-a-time-plans, J. Am. Statist. Assoc., 68, 353, 1973.
33. D’Auria, F. and Giannotti, W., Development of a code with the capability of internal assessment of uncertainty, Nuclear Technology, 131, 159, 2000.
34. Deif, A.S., Sensitivity Analysis in Linear Systems, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1986.
35. Dunker, A.M., Efficient calculation of sensitivity coefficients for complex atmospheric models, Atmos. Environ., 15, 1155, 1981.
36. Dunker, A.M., The decoupled direct method for calculating sensitivity coefficients in chemical kinetics, J. Chem. Phys., 81, 2385, 1984.
37. Ellingson, R.G. and Fouquart, Y., The intercomparison of radiation codes used in climate models: An overview, J. Geophys. Res., 95, 8925, 1991.
38. Errico, R.M. and Vukicevic, T., A sensitivity analysis using an adjoint of the PSU-NCAR Mesoscale Model, Mon. Wea. Rev., 120, 1644-1660, 1992.
39. Eslami, M., Theory of Sensitivity in Dynamic Systems, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 1994.
40. Fels, B.S. and Schwarzkopf, M.D., The simplified exchange approximation. A new method for radiative transfer calculation, J. Atmos. Sci., 32, 1475, 1975.
41. Fiacco, A.V., Ed., Sensitivity, Stability, and Parametric Analysis (A publication of the Mathematical Programming Society), North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1984.
42. Fischer, R.A., The Design of Experiments, Oliver & Boyd, Edinburgh, 1935.
43. Frank, P.M., Introduction to System Sensitivity Theory, Academic Press, New York, 1978.
44. Gandini, A., Generalized Perturbation Theory (GPT) methods: A heuristic approach, in Advances in Nuclear Science and Technology, 19, Plenum Press, New York, 1987.
45. Greenspan, E., New developments in sensitivity theory, in Advances in Nuclear Science and Technology, 14, Plenum Press, New York, 1982.
46. Hall, M.C.G., Cacuci, D.G., and Schlesinger, AE., Sensitivity analysis of a radiative convective model by the adjoint method, J. Atmos. Sci., 39, 2038-2050, 1982.
47. Hall, M.C.G. and Cacuci, D.G., Physical interpretation of the adjoint functions for sensitivity analysis of atmospheric models, J. Atmos. Sci., 40, 2537, 1983.
48. Haynes, P.H. and McIntyre, M.E., On the evolution of vorticity and potential vorticity in the presence of diabatic heating and frictional or other forces, J. Atmos. Sci., 44, 828, 1987.
49. Hora, S.C. and Iman, R.L., Expert opinion in risk analysis: The NUREG1150 methodology, Nucl. Sci. Eng., 102, 323, 1989.
50. Hsu, Y. J. and Arakawa, A., Numerical modeling of the atmosphere with an isentropic vertical coordinate, Mon. Wea. Rev., 118, 1933, 1990.
51. Iman, R.L. and Conover, W.J., A distribution-free approach to inducing rank correlation among input variables, Commun. Statist. Simul. Comput. B, 11, 311, 1982.
52. Inamdar, A.K. and Ramanathan, V., Physics of greenhouse and convection in warm oceans, J. Clim., 7, 715, 1994.
53. Ionescu-Bujor, M. and Cacuci, D.G., Adjoint sensitivity analysis of the RELAP5/MOD3.2 two-fluid thermal-hydraulic code system: II. Applications, Nucl. Sci. Eng., 136, 85, 2000.
54. Ionescu-Bujor, M., and Cacuci, D.G., Illustrative application of the adjoint sensitivity analysis procedure to reliability models of electromechanical devices, SIELMEN 2003, The 4th International Conference on Electromechanical and Energetic Systems, September 26-27, 2003, Chisinau, Republic of Moldavia, 2003.
55. James, I.N., Suppression of baroclinic instability in horizontally sheared flows, J. Atmos. Sci., 44, 3710, 1987.
56. James, I.N. and Gray, L.J., Concerning the effect of surface drag on the circulation of a baroclinic planetary atmosphere, Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 112, 1231, 1986.
57. Kanamitsu, M. et al., Recent changes implemented into the global forecast system at NMC, Wea. Forecasting, 124, 1145-1160, 1991.
58. Kiehl, J.T. and Briegleb, B.P., Comparison of the observed and calculated clear sky greenhouse effect: Implications for climate studies, J. Geophys. Res., 97, 100037, 1992.
59. Kimoto, M., Mukougawa, H., and Yoden, S., Medium-range forecast skill variation and blocking transition: A case study, Mon. Wea. Rev., 120, 1616, 1992.
60. Kleijnen, J.P.C., Experimental design for sensitivity analysis, optimization and validation of simulation models. In: Handbook of Simulation – Principles, Methodology, Advances, Applications, and Practice, Banks, J. (ed), Wiley, New York, 1998.
61. Kleijnen, J.P.C. and Helton, J.C., Statistical analyses of scatterplots to identify important factors in large-scale simulations. 1. Review and comparison of techniques, Reliab. Eng., Syst. Safety, 65, 147, 1999.
62. Kleijnen, J.P.C. and Helton, J.C., Statistical analyses of scatterplots to identify important factors in large-scale simulations. 2. Robustness of techniques, Reliab. Eng., Syst. Safety, 65, 187, 1999.
63. Kleijnen, J.P.C. and Helton, J.C., Statistical analyses of scatterplots to identify important factors in large-scale simulations, SAND98-2202, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1999.
64. Kokotovic, P.V. et al., Singular perturbations: Order reduction in control system design, JACC., 1972.
65. Kramer, M.A. et. al., An improved computational method for sensitivity analysis: Green’s function method with AIM, Appl. Math. Modeling, 5, 432, 1981.
66. Kramer, M.A. et. al., Parameter scaling of mathematical models, Appl. Math. Modeling, 8, 341, 1984.
67. Krishnamurti, T.N. and Dignon, N., The FSU global spectral model. Dept. of Meteorology, Florida State University, 1988.
68. Lacis, A.A. and Hansen, J.E., A parameterization for the absorption of solar radiation in the Earth’s atmosphere, J. Atmos. Sci., 31, 118, 1974.
69. Li, Y. et al., Variational data assimilation with a semi-implicit global shallow water equation model and its adjoint, Mon. Wea. Rev., 121, 1759, 1993.
70. Li, Z. and Navon, I.M., Sensitivity analysis of outgoing radiation at the top of the atmosphere in the NCEP/MRF model, Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres, 103, 3801, 1998.
71. Lillie, R.A. et al., Sensitivity/Uncertainty analysis for free-in-air tissue kerma at Hiroshima and Nagasaki due to initial radiation, Nucl. Sci. Eng., 100, 105, 1988.
72. Lorenz, E.N. and Emanuel, K.A., Optimal sites for supplementary weather observations: Simulation with a small model, Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 55, No. 3, 399, 1998.
73. Lowe, P.R. and Ficke, J.M., The computation of saturation vapor pressure, Tech. Pap. No. 4-74, Environmental Research Prediction Facility, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, 27, [NTIS AD-7783161], 1974.
74. Madsen, H.O. et al., Methods of Structural Safety, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1986.
75. Manabe, S. and Strickler, R.F., Thermal equilibrium of an atmosphere with a convective adjustment, J. Atmos. Sci., 21, 361, 1964.
76. Manabe, S. and Wetherald, R.T., Thermal equilibrium of the atmosphere with a given distribution of relative humidity, J. Atmos. Sci., 24, 241, 1967.
77. McKay, M.D. et al., A comparison of three methods of selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code, Technometrics, 21, 239, 1979.
78. McKay, M.D., Evaluating prediction uncertainty, Technical Report NUREG/CR-6311, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Los Alamos National Laboratories, 1995.
79. Moorthi, S. and Suarez, M.J., Relaxed Arakawa-Schubert: A parameterization of moist convection for general circulation models, Mon. Wea. Rev., 120, 978, 1992.
80. Morris, M.D., Factorial sampling plans for preliminary computational experiments, Technometrics, 33, 161, 1991.
81. Morss R. E., Emanuel, K.A., and Snyder, C., Adaptive observations in a quasi-geostrophic model. 12th Conference on Numerical Weather Prediction, 11-16 January 1998, Phoenix, Arizona, 10-11, 1998.
82. Navon, I.M. et al., Variational data assimilation with an adiabatic version of the NMC spectral model, Mont. Wea. Rev., 120, 1433, 1992.
83. Navon, I.M., Practical and theoretical aspects of adjoint parameter estimation and identifiability in meteorology and oceanography, Dynamics of Atmospheres and Oceans, 27, (1-4), 55, 1998.
84. Palmén, E. and Newton, C.W., Atmospheric Circulation Systems, New York Academic, 1967.
85. Parker, D., Learning logic, Working paper 47, Center for Computational Research in Economics and Management Science, MIT, 1985.
86. Pu, Z.X., Kalnay, E., and Toth, Z., Application of the quasi-inverse linear and adjoint NCEP global models to targeted observations during FASTEX. 12th Conference on Numerical Weather Prediction, 11-16 January 1998, Phoenix, Arizona, 8-9, 1998.
87. Rabier, F., Courtier, P., and Talagrand, O., An application of adjoint models to sensitivity analysis, Beitr. Phys. Atmosph., 65, 177, 1992.
88. Rabinovich, S.G., Measurement Errors and Uncertainties: Theory and Practice, 2nd ed., Springer-Verlag, New York, 2000.
89. Ramanathan, V. et al., Cloud-radiative forcing and climate: Results from the Earth Radiation Budget Experiment, Science, 243, 57, 1989.
90. Raval, A. and Ramanathan, V., Observational determination of the greenhouse effect, Nature, 342, 758, 1989.
91. Redelsperger, J. L. and Guichard, F., Detailed analysis of cloud systems observed during TOGA-COARE: Simulations forced & unforced by the large scale motions. New insights and approaches to convective parameterization. Proc. ECMWF Workshop, Reading, United Kingdom, ECMWF, 58, 1996.
92. Ronen, Y., Uncertainty analysis based on sensitivity analysis, in Uncertainty Analysis, Ronen, Y., Ed., CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1988.
93. Rosenwasser, E. and Yusupov, R., Sensitivity of Automatic Control Systems, CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2000.
94. Saltelli, A. et al., Sensitivity analysis of model output: An investigation of new techniques, Comput. Statist. Data Anal., 15, 211, 1993.
95. Saltelli, A. and Sobol’, I.M., About the use of rank transformation in sensitivity analysis of model output, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Safety, 50, 225, 1995.
96. Saltelli, A. et al., A quantitative, model independent method for global sensitivity analysis of model output, Technometrics, 41, 39, 1999.
97. Sanchez, M.A. and Blower, S.M., Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis of the basic reproductive rate. Tuberculosis as an example, Am. J. Epidemiol., 145, 1127, 1997.
98. Schlesinger, M. E. and Gates, W. L., The January and July performance of the OSU two-level atmospheric general circulation model, J. Atmos. Sci., 37, 1914, 1980.
99. 2 transmissivities and cooling rates, J. Geophys. Res., 90, 10541, 1985.
100. Schwarzkopf, M.D. and Fels, S.B., The simplified exchange method revisited: An accurate, rapid method for computation of infrared cooling rate and fluxes. J. Geophys. Res., 96, 9075, 1991.
101. Sepold, L. et al., Investigation of an overheated PWR-Type fuel rod simulator bundle cooled down by steam; Part I: Experimental and calculational results of the QUENCH-04 Test, Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe, FZKA 6412, 2002.
102. Shapiro, S.S. and Gross, A.J., Statistical Modeling Techniques, Marcel Dekker, New York, 1981.
103. Slingo, J.M., The development and verification of a cloud prediction scheme for the ECMWF model, Quart. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc., 113, 899, 1987.
104. Smith, D.L., Probability, Statistics, and Data Uncertainties in Nuclear Science and Technology, American Nuclear Society, LaGrange Park, IL, 1991.
105. Sobol’, I.M., Sensitivity analysis for non-linear mathematical models, Math. Model. Comput. Exp., 1, 407, 1993.
106. Stephens, G.L., The parameterization of radiation for numerical weather prediction and climate models, Mon. Wea. Rev, 112, 827, 1984.
107. Stone, C.J., Optimal global rate of convergence for nonparametric regression, Ann. Statist., 10, 1040, 1982.
108. Stone, C.J., Additive regression and other nonparametric models, Ann. Statist., 13, 689, 1985.
109. Takacs, L.L., Molod, A., and Wang, T., Documentation of the Goddard Earth Observing System (GEOS) general circulation model-Version 1. NASA Tech. Memo. 104606, Vol. 1., 1994.
110. Tomovic, R. and Vucobratovic, M., General Sensitivity Theory, Elsevier, New York, 1972.
111. Tracton, M. S. et al., Dynamical extended range forecasting (DERF) at the National Meteorological Center, Mon. Wea. Rev., 117, 1606, 1989.
112. Turanyi, T., Sensitivity analysis of complex kinetic systems. Tools and applications, J. Math. Chem., 5, 203, 1990.
113. US NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission), Severe accident risks: An assessment for five U.S. nuclear power plants, NUREG-1150, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, 1990-1991.
114. US DOE (US Department of Energy), Title 40CFR Part 191 Compliance Certification Application for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, DOE/CAO1996-2184, US Department of Energy, Carlsbad Area Office, Carlsbad, NM, 1996.
115. Xiang, Y. and Mishra, S., Probabilistic multiphase flow modelling using the limit-state method, Groundwater, 35(5), 820, 1997.
116. Yamanouchi, T. and Charlock, T.P., Comparison of radiation budget at the TOA and surface in the Antarctic from ERBE and ground surface measurements, J. Climate, 8, 3109, 1995.
117. Yang, W. and I.M. Navon, Documentation of the tangent linear model and its adjoint of the adiabatic version of the NASA GEOS-1 C-grid GCM version 5.2. NASA Tech. Memo. 104606, Vol.8. 61pp, 1996.
118. Yang, W., I.M. Navon, and R. Todling, Documentation of the tangent linear and adjoint models of the Relaxed Arakawa-Schubert moisture parameterization packages of the NASA GEOS-1 GCM (version 5.2). NASA Tech. Memo. 104606, 11. 37, 1997.
119. Yang, Y. et al., Sensitivity to large-scale environmental fields of the relaxed Arakawa-Schubert parameterization in the NASA GEOS-1 GCM, Monthly Weather Review, 127, 2359, 1999.
120. Zhang, M.H., et al., Approach of comparison for clear-sky radiative fluxes from general circulation models with Earth Radiation Budget Experiment data, J. Geophys. Res., 99, 5515, 1994.
121. Zhang, M.H. et al., Diagnostic study of climate feedback processes in atmospheric general circulation models, J. Geophys. Res., 99, 5525, 1994.
122. Zhu, Y., and Navon, I. M., Documentation of the Tangent-Linear and Adjoint Models of the radiation and boundary layer parameterization packages of the FSU Global Spectral Model T42L12. Tech. Report, FSUSCRI-97-98, 1997.
123. Zhu, Y., and Navon, I.M., FSU-GSM forecast error sensitivity to initial conditions: Application to Indian Summer Monsoon, Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics, 68, 35, 1998.
124. Zou, X., Tangent linear and adjoint of “on-off” processes and their feasibility for use in 4-dimensional variational assimilation, Tellus, 49A, 3, 1997.
125. Zou, X. et al., An adjoint sensitivity study of blocking in a two-layer isentropic model, Mon. Wea. Rev., 121, 2833, 1993.