Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Error Modeling”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2013

Modeling Errors in Daily Precipitation Measurements: Additive or Multiplicative?

The definition and quantification of uncertainty depend on the error model used. For uncertainties in precipitation measurements, two types of error models have been widely adopted: the additive error model and the multiplicative error model. This leads to incompatible specifications of uncertainties and impedes intercomparison and application.In this letter, we assess the suitability of both models for satellite-based daily precipitation measurements in an effort to clarify the uncertainty representation. Three criteria were employed to evaluate the applicability of either model: (1) better separation of the systematic and random errors; (2) applicability to the large range of variability in daily precipitation; and (3) better predictive skills. It is found that the multiplicative error model is a much better choice under all three criteria. It extracted the systematic errors more cleanly, was more consistent with the large variability of precipitation measurements, and produced superior predictions of the error characteristics. The additive error model had several weaknesses, such as non constant variance resulting from systematic errors leaking into random errors, and the lack of prediction capability. Therefore, the multiplicative error model is a better choice.

Modeling↗
NASA NTRS1993

Quantification of model error via an interval model with nonparametric error bound

The quantification of model uncertainty is becoming increasingly important as robust control is an important tool for control system design and analysis. This paper presents an algorithm that effectively characterizes the model uncertainty in terms of parametric and nonparametric uncertainties. The algorithm utilizes the frequency domain model error which is estimated from the spectra of output error and input data. The parametric uncertainty is represented as an interval transfer function while the nonparametric uncertainty is bounded by a designed error bound transfer function. Both discrete and continuous systems are discussed in this paper. The algorithm is applied to the Mini-Mast example, and the detail analysis is given.

Lew, Jiann-Shiun↗
NASA NTRS1991

Syntactic error modeling and scoring normalization in speech recognition: Error modeling and scoring normalization in the speech recognition task for adult literacy training

The purpose was to develop a speech recognition system to be able to detect speech which is pronounced incorrectly, given that the text of the spoken speech is known to the recognizer. Better mechanisms are provided for using speech recognition in a literacy tutor application. Using a combination of scoring normalization techniques and cheater-mode decoding, a reasonable acceptance/rejection threshold was provided. In continuous speech, the system was tested to be able to provide above 80 pct. correct acceptance of words, while correctly rejecting over 80 pct. of incorrectly pronounced words.

Olorenshaw, Lex↗
NASA NTRS1971

Sun compass error model

An error model is described for the Apollo 15 sun compass, a contingency navigational device. Field test data are presented along with significant results of the test. The errors reported include a random error resulting from tilt in leveling the sun compass, a random error because of observer sighting inaccuracies, a bias error because of mean tilt in compass leveling, a bias error in the sun compass itself, and a bias error because the device is leveled to the local terrain slope.

Blucker, T. J.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Dominant modes via model error

Obtaining a reduced model of a stable mechanical system with proportional damping is considered. Such systems can be conveniently represented in modal coordinates. Two popular schemes, the modal cost analysis and the balancing method, offer simple means of identifying dominant modes for retention in the reduced model. The dominance is measured via the modal costs in the case of modal cost analysis and via the singular values of the Gramian-product in the case of balancing. Though these measures do not exactly reflect the more appropriate model error, which is the H2 norm of the output-error between the full and the reduced models, they do lead to simple computations. Normally, the model error is computed after the reduced model is obtained, since it is believed that, in general, the model error cannot be easily computed a priori. The authors point out that the model error can also be calculated a priori, just as easily as the above measures. Hence, the model error itself can be used to determine the dominant modes. Moreover, the simplicity of the computations does not presume any special properties of the system, such as small damping, orthogonal symmetry, etc.

Yousuff, A.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Assessment of Numerical and Modeling Errors of RANS based Transition Models for Low-Reynolds Numbers 2-D Flows

In this paper we report the outcome of selected workshops organized as part of the NATO Applied Vehicle Technology (AVT)-313 activity Incompressible Laminar-to-Turbulent Flow Transition Study that focused on assessing the numerical and modeling accuracy of the γ−Reθ and γ transition models coupled to the k−ω Shear-Stress Transport (SST) two-equation eddy-viscosity model. Three different test cases involving nominally 2D flow configurations were selected: flow over a flat plate with two different levels of turbulence intensity at the inlet; flow around the Eppler 387 foil at a Reynolds number of 3×10^5 and angles of attack of 1 deg. and 7 deg. flow around the NACA 0015 foil at a Reynolds number of 1.8×10^5 and angles of attack of 5 deg. and10 deg. The flat plate flow conditions correspond to natural and by-pass transition, whereas the other two test cases include laminar separation bubbles that lead to separation-induced transition. For each test case, the selected quantities of interest include both integral and local flow quantities. Geometrically similar grids with a wide range of grid refinement ratios were generated for each of the test cases to allow the estimation of numerical uncertainties for all quantities of interest selected for this study. Several RANS flow solvers were used, employing common grids with the same boundary conditions and mathematical models. Therefore, it is possible to analyze the consistency of the results, i.e., to check if the intervals defined by the different numerical solutions with their respective uncertainties overlap with each other. Modeling errors can also be addressed for the selected flow quantities that have experimental data available. However, the experimental information available in these cases is not sufficient to guarantee that experiments and simulations are performed with the same settings. Nonetheless, the available experimental data is sufficient to guarantee that modeling errors are significantly reduced with the use of the transition models when compared to simulations performed using only the k−ω SST model.

CFD Modeling↗
NASA NTRS1991

Study of geopotential error models used in orbit determination error analysis

The uncertainty in the geopotential model is currently one of the major error sources in the orbit determination of low-altitude Earth-orbiting spacecraft. The results of an investigation of different geopotential error models and modeling approaches currently used for operational orbit error analysis support at the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) are presented, with emphasis placed on sequential orbit error analysis using a Kalman filtering algorithm. Several geopotential models, known as the Goddard Earth Models (GEMs), were developed and used at GSFC for orbit determination. The errors in the geopotential models arise from the truncation errors that result from the omission of higher order terms (omission errors) and the errors in the spherical harmonic coefficients themselves (commission errors). At GSFC, two error modeling approaches were operationally used to analyze the effects of geopotential uncertainties on the accuracy of spacecraft orbit determination - the lumped error modeling and uncorrelated error modeling. The lumped error modeling approach computes the orbit determination errors on the basis of either the calibrated standard deviations of a geopotential model's coefficients or the weighted difference between two independently derived geopotential models. The uncorrelated error modeling approach treats the errors in the individual spherical harmonic components as uncorrelated error sources and computes the aggregate effect using a combination of individual coefficient effects. This study assesses the reasonableness of the two error modeling approaches in terms of global error distribution characteristics and orbit error analysis results. Specifically, this study presents the global distribution of geopotential acceleration errors for several gravity error models and assesses the orbit determination errors resulting from these error models for three types of spacecraft - the Gamma Ray Observatory, the Ocean Topography Experiment, and the Cosmic Background Explorer.

Yee, C.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Model Error Estimation for the CPTEC Eta Model

Statistical data assimilation systems require the specification of forecast and observation error statistics. Forecast error is due to model imperfections and differences between the initial condition and the actual state of the atmosphere. Practical four-dimensional variational (4D-Var) methods try to fit the forecast state to the observations and assume that the model error is negligible. Here with a number of simplifying assumption, a framework is developed for isolating the model error given the forecast error at two lead-times. Two definitions are proposed for the Talagrand ratio tau, the fraction of the forecast error due to model error rather than initial condition error. Data from the CPTEC Eta Model running operationally over South America are used to calculate forecast error statistics and lower bounds for tau.

Tippett, Michael K.↗
NASA NTRS1991

An analysis of the least-squares problem for the DSN systematic pointing error model

A systematic pointing error model is used to calibrate antennas in the Deep Space Network. The least squares problem is described and analyzed along with the solution methods used to determine the model's parameters. Specifically studied are the rank degeneracy problems resulting from beam pointing error measurement sets that incorporate inadequate sky coverage. A least squares parameter subset selection method is described and its applicability to the systematic error modeling process is demonstrated on Voyager 2 measurement distribution.

Alvarez, L. S.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Performance Metrics, Error Modeling, and Uncertainty Quantification

A common set of statistical metrics has been used to summarize the performance of models or measurements-­ the most widely used ones being bias, mean square error, and linear correlation coefficient. They assume linear, additive, Gaussian errors, and they are interdependent, incomplete, and incapable of directly quantifying un­certainty. The authors demonstrate that these metrics can be directly derived from the parameters of the simple linear error model. Since a correct error model captures the full error information, it is argued that the specification of a parametric error model should be an alternative to the metrics-based approach. The error-modeling meth­odology is applicable to both linear and nonlinear errors, while the metrics are only meaningful for linear errors. In addition, the error model expresses the error structure more naturally, and directly quantifies uncertainty. This argument is further explained by highlighting the intrinsic connections between the performance metrics, the error model, and the joint distribution between the data and the reference.

Quantification↗
NASA NTRS1990

Statistical analysis of modeling error in structural dynamic systems

The paper presents a generic statistical model of the (total) modeling error for conventional space structures in their launch configuration. Modeling error is defined as the difference between analytical prediction and experimental measurement. It is represented by the differences between predicted and measured real eigenvalues and eigenvectors. Comparisons are made between pre-test and post-test models. Total modeling error is then subdivided into measurement error, experimental error and 'pure' modeling error, and comparisons made between measurement error and total modeling error. The generic statistical model presented in this paper is based on the first four global (primary structure) modes of four different structures belonging to the generic category of Conventional Space Structures (specifically excluding large truss-type space structures). As such, it may be used to evaluate the uncertainty of predicted mode shapes and frequencies, sinusoidal response, or the transient response of other structures belonging to the same generic category.

Hasselman, T. K.↗
NASA NTRS1979

Optimal estimation of large structure model errors

In-flight estimation of large structure model errors is usually required as a means of detecting inevitable deficiencies in large structure controller/estimator models. The present paper deals with a least-squares formulation which seeks to minimize a quadratic functional of the model errors. The properties of these error estimates are analyzed. It is shown that an arbitrary model error can be decomposed as the sum of two components that are orthogonal in a suitably defined function space. Relations between true and estimated errors are defined. The estimates are found to be approximations that retain many of the significant dynamics of the true model errors. Current efforts are directed toward application of the analytical results to a reference large structure model.

Rodriguez, G.↗
NASA NTRS1981

Model error estimation for large flexible spacecraft

The basic model obtained for spacecraft control system design applications is used to develop the control and estimation algorithms which constitute integral elements of the control system. The performance of this system is limited on account of modeling errors. The presence of such errors is inevitable in connection with truncated dynamics, parameter uncertainties, neglected nonlinearities, and external disturbances. In many cases, an approximate knowledge of the model errors can only be established by means of an estimation procedure. The present investigation has the objective to outline an approach to estimate errors inherent in a reduced-order model and to illustrate its application to modeling problems arising in spacecraft control system design. The considered procedure makes use of the principle of least-squares. In the discussed application this principle is employed to minimize a quadratic functional of the model errors.

Rodriguez, G.↗
NASA NTRS2022

Using an Explainable Machine Learning Approach to Characterize Earth System Model Errors: Application of SHAP Analysis to Modeling Lightning Flash Occurrence

Computational models of the Earth System are critical tools for modern scientific inquiry. Effortstoward evaluating and improving errors in representations of physical and chemical processes inthese large computational systems are commonly stymied by highly nonlinear and complexerror behavior. Recent work has shown that these errors can be effectively predicted usingmodern Artificial Intelligence (A.I.) techniques. In this work, we go beyond these previousstudies to apply an interpretable A.I. technique to not only predict model errors but also movetoward understanding the underlying reasons for successful error prediction. We use XGBoostclassification trees and SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis to explore the errors inthe prediction of lightning occurrence in the NASA GEOS model, a widely used Earth SystemModel. This explainable error prediction system can effectively predict the model error andindicates that the errors are strongly related to convective processes and the characteristics ofthe land surface.

Artificial intelligence↗
NASA NTRS2017

Role of Forcing Uncertainty and Background Model Error Characterization in Snow Data Assimilation

Accurate specification of the model error covariances in data assimilation systems is a challenging issue. Ensemble land data assimilation methods rely on stochastic perturbations of input forcing and model prognostic fields for developing representations of input model error covariances. This article examines the limitations of using a single forcing dataset for specifying forcing uncertainty inputs for assimilating snow depth retrievals. Using an idealized data assimilation experiment, the article demonstrates that the use of hybrid forcing input strategies (either through the use of an ensemble of forcing products or through the added use of the forcing climatology) provide a better characterization of the background model error, which leads to improved data assimilation results, especially during the snow accumulation and melt-time periods. The use of hybrid forcing ensembles is then employed for assimilating snow depth retrievals from the AMSR2 (Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer 2) instrument over two domains in the continental USA with different snow evolution characteristics. Over a region near the Great Lakes, where the snow evolution tends to be ephemeral, the use of hybrid forcing ensembles provides significant improvements relative to the use of a single forcing dataset. Over the Colorado headwaters characterized by large snow accumulation, the impact of using the forcing ensemble is less prominent and is largely limited to the snow transition time periods. The results of the article demonstrate that improving the background model error through the use of a forcing ensemble enables the assimilation system to better incorporate the observational information.

assimilation↗
NASA NTRS1988

Identifiability Of Systems With Modeling Errors

Advances in theory of modeling errors reported. Recent paper on errors in mathematical models of deterministic linear or weakly nonlinear systems. Extends theoretical work described in NPO-16661 and NPO-16785. Presents concrete way of accounting for difference in structure between mathematical model and physical process or system that it represents.

Hadaegh, Yadolah "fred"↗
NASA NTRS1980

Model error estimation for large space systems

In-flight estimation of large structure model errors may have to be carried out in order to detect inevitable deficiencies in large structure controller/estimator models. These error estimates can most efficiently be obtained by the minimization of a quadratic functional of the model errors and on the subsequent analysis of the resulting optimal model error estimates. An integral operator approach to estimation leads to a geometrical interpretation of the model error estimation process. One of the significant insights gained with this interpretation is that the actual but unknown model errors can be decomposed as the sum of two distinct components that are orthogonal in some sense. One of these components is a so-called minimal error vector that retains many of the significant dynamics of the actual errors. The basic ideas in the model error estimation approach are first set forth with a two-dimensional analogy that has most of the essential features of the general estimation problem. The generalized results are then established and their application to a reference large structure model illustrated.

Rodriguez, G.↗
NASA NTRS2022

How Well do Multisatellite Products Capture the Space-Time Dynamics of Precipitation? Part II: Building an Error Model Through Spectral System Identification

Satellite precipitation products, as all quantitative estimates, come with some inherent degree of uncertainty. To associate a quantitative value of the uncertainty to each individual estimate, error modeling is necessary. Most of the error models proposed so far compute the uncertainty as a function of precipitation intensity only, and only at one specific spatio-temporal scale. We propose a spectral error model which accounts for the neighboring space-time dynamics of precipitation into the uncertainty quantification. Systematic distortions of the precipitation signal and random errors are characterized distinctively in every frequency-wavenumber band in the Fourier domain, to accurately characterize error across scales. The systematic distortions are represented as a deterministic space-time linear filtering term. The random errors are represented as a non-stationary additive noise. The spectral error model is applied to the IMERG multi satellite precipitation product and its parameters are estimated empirically through a system identification approach using the GV-MRMS gauge-radar measurements as reference (“truth”) over the eastern United States. The filtering term is found to be essentially low-pass. While traditional error models attribute most of the error variance to random errors, it is found here that the systematic filtering term explains 48% of the error variance at the native resolution of IMERG. This fact confirms that, at high resolution, filtering effects in satellite precipitation products cannot be ignored, and that the error cannot be represented as a purely random additive or multiplicative term. An important consequence is that precipitation estimates derived from totally different sources shall not be expected to automatically have statistically independent errors.

Precipitation↗