Comparison of data-driven uncertainty quantification methods for a carbon dioxide storage benchmark scenario

被引:18
|
作者
Koeppel, Markus [1 ]
Franzelin, Fabian [2 ]
Kroeker, Ilja [1 ]
Oladyshkin, Sergey [3 ]
Santin, Gabriele [1 ]
Wittwar, Dominik [1 ]
Barth, Andrea [1 ]
Haasdonk, Bernard [1 ]
Nowak, Wolfgang [3 ]
Pflueger, Dirk [2 ]
Rohde, Christian [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Stuttgart, IANS, Pfaffenwaldring 57, D-70569 Stuttgart, Germany
[2] Univ Stuttgart, IPVS, Univ Str 38, D-70569 Stuttgart, Germany
[3] Univ Stuttgart, IWS, Pfaffenwaldring 5a, D-70569 Stuttgart, Germany
关键词
Porous media benchmark; Arbitrary polynomial chaos; Spatially adaptive sparse grids; Kernel greedy interpolation; Hybrid stochastic Galerkin; Stochastic collocation; DEEP SALINE AQUIFERS; 2-PHASE FLOW; CO2; STORAGE; SENSITIVITY; EFFICIENT; PROPAGATION; REGRESSION; INJECTION; ALGORITHM; TRANSPORT;
D O I
10.1007/s10596-018-9785-x
中图分类号
TP39 [计算机的应用];
学科分类号
081203 ; 0835 ;
摘要
A variety of methods is available to quantify uncertainties arising within the modeling of flow and transport in carbon dioxide storage, but there is a lack of thorough comparisons. Usually, raw data from such storage sites can hardly be described by theoretical statistical distributions since only very limited data is available. Hence, exact information on distribution shapes for all uncertain parameters is very rare in realistic applications. We discuss and compare four different methods tested for data-driven uncertainty quantification based on a benchmark scenario of carbon dioxide storage. In the benchmark, for which we provide data and code, carbon dioxide is injected into a saline aquifer modeled by the nonlinear capillarity-free fractional flow formulation for two incompressible fluid phases, namely carbon dioxide and brine. To cover different aspects of uncertainty quantification, we incorporate various sources of uncertainty such as uncertainty of boundary conditions, of parameters in constitutive relations, and of material properties. We consider recent versions of the following non-intrusive and intrusive uncertainty quantification methods: arbitrary polynomial chaos, spatially adaptive sparse grids, kernel-based greedy interpolation, and hybrid stochastic Galerkin. The performance of each approach is demonstrated assessing expectation value and standard deviation of the carbon dioxide saturation against a reference statistic based on Monte Carlo sampling. We compare the convergence of all methods reporting on accuracy with respect to the number of model runs and resolution. Finally, we offer suggestions about the methods' advantages and disadvantages that can guide the modeler for uncertainty quantification in carbon dioxide storage and beyond.
引用
收藏
页码:339 / 354
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] FAST AND FLEXIBLE UNCERTAINTY QUANTIFICATION THROUGH A DATA-DRIVEN SURROGATE MODEL
    Dietrich, Felix
    Kuenzner, Florian
    Neckel, Tobias
    Koester, Gerta
    Bungartz, Hans-Joachim
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR UNCERTAINTY QUANTIFICATION, 2018, 8 (02) : 175 - 192
  • [32] Data-driven Uncertainty Quantification for Systematic Coarse-grained Models
    Jin, Tangxin
    Chazirakis, Anthony
    Kalligiannaki, Evangelia
    Harmandaris, Vagelis
    Katsoulakis, Markos A.
    arXiv, 2020,
  • [33] Uncertainty quantification in data-driven modelling with application to soil properties prediction
    He, Geng-Fu
    Yin, Zhen-Yu
    Zhang, Pin
    ACTA GEOTECHNICA, 2025, 20 (02) : 843 - 859
  • [34] Data-driven uncertainty quantification for systematic coarse-grained models
    Jin, Tangxin
    Chazirakis, Anthony
    Kalligiannaki, Evangelia
    Harmandaris, Vagelis
    Katsoulakis, Markos A.
    SOFT MATERIALS, 2020, 18 (2-3) : 348 - 368
  • [35] Bayesian neural networks for uncertainty quantification in data-driven materials modeling
    Olivier, Audrey
    Shields, Michael D.
    Graham-Brady, Lori
    COMPUTER METHODS IN APPLIED MECHANICS AND ENGINEERING, 2021, 386
  • [36] Data-driven Modelling of an Indirect Photoacoustic Carbon dioxide Sensor
    Srivastava, Ananya
    Sharma, Pranav
    Sikora, Axel
    Bittner, Achim
    Dehe, Alfons
    2024 IEEE APPLIED SENSING CONFERENCE, APSCON, 2024,
  • [37] The scenario approach for data-driven prognostics
    Cesani, D.
    Mazzoleni, M.
    Previdi, F.
    IFAC PAPERSONLINE, 2024, 58 (04): : 461 - 466
  • [38] Integrating physics of the problem into data-driven methods to enhance elastic full-waveform inversion with uncertainty quantification
    Negahdari, Vahid
    Moghadasi, Seyed Reza
    Razvan, Mohammad Reza
    PHYSICA D-NONLINEAR PHENOMENA, 2025, 472
  • [39] A comparison study of basic data-driven fault diagnosis and process monitoring methods on the benchmark Tennessee Eastman process
    Yin, Shen
    Ding, Steven X.
    Haghani, Adel
    Hao, Haiyang
    Zhang, Ping
    JOURNAL OF PROCESS CONTROL, 2012, 22 (09) : 1567 - 1581
  • [40] Comparison of Data-Driven Reconstruction Methods For Fault Detection
    Baraldi, Piero
    Di Maio, Francesco
    Genini, Davide
    Zio, Enrico
    IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON RELIABILITY, 2015, 64 (03) : 852 - 860