1887

Abstract

Summary

In the context of oil industry, many problems consist in a minimization process of a computationally expensive function with bound constraints. The values of the objective function are in general the output of a complex simulator for which we don’t have any explicit expression. And the absence of any information on the function gradient narrows the resolution field to algorithms using no first or second order derivatives.

There exists many different approaches in derivative free optimization, among which the most popular are space partitioning methods like DIRECT, direct search methods like Nelder Mead or MADS but also evolutionary algorithms like genetic algorithms, evolution strategies or other similar methods. The main drawback for all these methods is that they can suffer from a poor convergence rate and a high computational cost, especially for high dimensional cases. However, they can succeed in finding a global optimum where all other classical methods fail.

In this work we consider surrogate based optimization which has already been widely used for many years. A surrogate model is a framework used to minimize a function by sequentially building and minimizing a simpler model (surrogate) of the original function. In this work we build a new surrogate model by using the sparse grid interpolation method. Basically, the sparse grid approach is a grid error-controlled hierarchical approximation method which neglects the basis functions with the smallest supports. This approach was introduced in 1963 by Smolyak in order to evaluate integrals in high dimensions. It was then applied for PDE approximations but also for optimization and more recently for sensitivity analysis.

Compared to the first optimization algorithm based on sparse grids proposed by Klimke et al, a local refinement step is constructed here in order to explore the more promising regions. Moreover, no optimization steps are performed over the objective function, which reduces significantly the number of function evaluations employed.

In this talk we present our GOSGrid optimization algorithm based on sparse grids. We also compare it with other derivative free global algorithms. The comparison is based on a parameter estimation problem in reservoir engineering.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.20141838
2014-09-08
2024-03-29
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Audet, C. and DennisJ.E.Jr
    , [2006] Mesh adaptive direct search algorithms for constraint optimization. SIAM J.Optim, 17, 217–.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. , [2009] A progressive barrier for derivative-free nonlinear programming. SIAM J.Optim, 20(4), 445–472.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bonnans, J.F., Gilbert, J.C., Lemarechal, C. and Sagastizabal, C.
    [2003] Numerical Optimization: Theoretical And Practical Aspects. Springer-Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Booker, A.J., DennisJ.E., Jr, Frank, P.D., Serani, D.B., Torczon, V. and Trosset, M.W.
    [1999] A rigorous framework for optimization of expensive functions by surrogates. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 17(1):1–13.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bungatz, H-J and Griebel, M.
    [2004] Sparse grids. Acta numerica, 13, 123–.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Buzzard, G., Donahue, M. and Rundell, A.
    [2009] Parameter Identification with Adaptive sparse grid-based Optimization for Models of Cellular Processes. Methods in Bioengineering: Systems Analysis of Biological Networks, 211–232.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Causse, M.
    [2010] Sparse grid : de l’approximation des EDP au calcul de sensibilité. Ph.D thesis, Toulouse.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Conn, A., Scheinberg, K. and Vicente, L.
    [2009] Introduction to derivative-free optimization. MPS-SIAM Series on Optimization.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Dumas, L., Herbert, V and Muyl, F.
    [2005] Comparison of global optimization methods for drag reduction in the automotive industry. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 3483, 957–.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Floris, F.J.T.
    [2001] Methods for quantifying the uncertainty of production forecasts; a comparative study. J. Petroleum Geoscience, 7.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Fowler, K.R., Reese, J.P., Kees, C.E., DennisJ.E., Jr, Kelley, C.T., Miller, C.T, Audet, C, Booker, A.J., Couture, G., Darwin, R.W., Farthing, M.W., Finkel, D.E., Gablonsky, J.M., Gray, G. and Kolda, T.G.
    [2008] Comparison of derivative-free optimization methods for groundwater supply and hydraulic capture community problems. Advances in Water Resources, 31, 757–.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Goldberg, D.
    [1989] Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and Machine Learning. Adison Wesley.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Hansen, N. and Ostermeier, A.
    [2001] Completely derandomized self-adaptation in evolution strategies. Evolutionary Computation, 9(2), 159–195.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Jones, D.R., Perttunen, C. D. and Stuckman, B.E.
    [1993] Lipschitzian Optimization without the Lips-chitz Constant. Journal of Optimization Theory and Application, 79(1), 157–181.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Jones, D.R., Schonlau, M. and Welch, W.J.
    [1998] Efficient Global Optimization of Expensive Black-Box Functions. Journal of Global Optimization, 13(4), 455–492.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Jones, D.R.
    [2001] A taxonomy of global optimization methods based on response surfaces. Journal of Global Optimization, 21, 383–.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Klimke, A.
    [2008] Sparse Grid Interpolation Toolbox User’s Guide. Institut für Angewandte Analysis und Numerische Simulation, Universität Stuttgart.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Mc Kay, M.D., Conover, W.J. and Beckman, R.J.
    [1979] A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code. Technometrics, 21, 245–.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Marsden, A.L., Wang, M., DennisJ.E.Jr, and Moin, P.
    [2004] Optimal aeroacoustic shape design using the surrogate management framework. Optimization and Engineering, 5(2), 235–262.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Oliver, D., Reynolds, A. and Liu, N.
    [2008] Inverse theory for petroleum characterization and history matching. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Roggero, F.
    [2001] Constraining stochastic reservoir models to dynamic data: an integrated approach. OAPEC seminar, Rueil, France.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Sinoquet, D. and Delbos, F.
    [2008] Adapted nonlinear optimization method for production data and 4d seismic inversion. ECMOR XI, expanded abstract B44.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Smolyak, S.A.
    [1963] Quadrature and interpolation formulas for tensor products of certain classes of functions. Soviet. Math. Dokl., 4, 243–.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.20141838
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.20141838
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error