Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Priori Assessment of Prediction Confidence for Data-Driven Turbulence Modeling

  • Published:
Flow, Turbulence and Combustion Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although Reynolds-Averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) equations are still the dominant tool for engineering design and analysis applications involving turbulent flows, standard RANS models are known to be unreliable in many flows of engineering relevance, including flows with separation, strong pressure gradients or mean flow curvature. With increasing amounts of 3-dimensional experimental data and high fidelity simulation data from Large Eddy Simulation (LES) and Direct Numerical Simulation (DNS), data-driven turbulence modeling has become a promising approach to increase the predictive capability of RANS simulations. However, the prediction performance of data-driven models inevitably depends on the choices of training flows. This work aims to identify a quantitative measure for a priori estimation of prediction confidence in data-driven turbulence modeling. This measure represents the distance in feature space between the training flows and the flow to be predicted. Specifically, the Mahalanobis distance and the kernel density estimation (KDE) technique are used as metrics to quantify the distance between flow data sets in feature space. To examine the relationship between these two extrapolation metrics and the machine learning model prediction performance, the flow over periodic hills at Re = 10595 is used as test set and seven flows with different configurations are individually used as training sets. The results show that the prediction error of the Reynolds stress anisotropy is positively correlated with Mahalanobis distance and KDE distance, demonstrating that both extrapolation metrics can be used to estimate the prediction confidence a priori. A quantitative comparison using correlation coefficients shows that the Mahalanobis distance is less accurate in estimating the prediction confidence than KDE distance. The extrapolation metrics introduced in this work and the corresponding analysis provide an approach to aid in the choice of data source and to assess the prediction performance for data-driven turbulence modeling.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Craft, T., Launder, B., Suga, K.: Development and application of a cubic eddy-viscosity model of turbulence. Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow 17, 108–115 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Milano, M., Koumoutsakos, P.: Neural network modeling for near wall turbulent flow. J. Comput. Phys. 182, 1–26 (2002)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Tracey, B., Duraisamy, K., Alonso, J.: Application of supervised learning to quantify uncertainties in turbulence and combustion modeling. In: 51st AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, Grapevine, TX, 2013 (AIAA, Reston, VA, 2013), paper 2013–0259

  4. Duraisamy, K., Zhang, Z.-J., Singh, A.P.: New approaches in turbulence and transition modeling using data-driven techniques. In: 53rd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Kissimmee, FL, 2015 (AIAA, Reston, VA, 2015), paper 2015–1284

  5. Ling, J., Templeton, J.: Evaluation of machine learning algorithms for prediction of regions of high reynolds averaged navier stokes uncertainty. Phys. Fluids (1994-present) 27(8), 085103 (2015)

  6. Ling, J., Ruiz, A., Lacaze, G., Oefelein, J.: Uncertainty analysis and data-driven model advances for a jet-in-crossflow. In: ASME Turbo Expo (2016)

  7. Ling, J., Kurzawski, A., Templeton, J.: Reynolds averaged turbulence modelling using deep neural networks with embedded invariance. J. Fluid Mech. 807, 155–166 (2016)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Wang, J.-X., Wu, J.-L., Xiao, H.: Physics-informed machine learning approach for reconstructing Reynolds stress modeling discrepancies based on DNS data. Phys. Rev. Fluids 2(3), 034603 (2017)

  9. Ling, J., Jones, R., Templeton, J.: Machine learning strategies for systems with invariance properties. J. Comput. Phys. 318, 22–35 (2016)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Liaw, A., Wiener, M.: Classification and regression by randomforest. R news 2(3), 18–22 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gorlé, C., Iaccarino, G.: A framework for epistemic uncertainty quantification of turbulent scalar flux models for Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes simulations. Phys. Fluids 25(5), 055105 (2013)

  12. Emory, M., Pecnik, R., Iaccarino, G.: Modeling structural uncertainties in Reynolds-averaged computations of shock/boundary layer interactions. In: 49th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, Orlando, FL, 2011 (AIAA, Reston, VA, 2011), paper 2011–479 (2011)

  13. Xiao, H., Wu, J.-L., Wang, J.-X., Sun, R., Roy, C.J.: Quantifying and reducing model-form uncertainties in Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes simulations: A data-driven, physics-based Bayesian approach. J. Comput. Phys. 324, 115–136 (2016)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Banerjee, S., Krahl, R., Durst, F., Zenger, C.: Presentation of anisotropy properties of turbulence, invariants versus eigenvalue approaches. J. Turbul. 8(32), 1–27 (2007)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Breiman, L.: Random forests. Mach. Learn. 45(1), 5–32 (2001)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Friedman, J., Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R.: The Elements of Statistical Learning. Springer, Berlin (2001)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Emory, M., Larsson, J., Iaccarino, G.: Modeling of structural uncertainties in Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes closures. Phys. Fluids 25(11), 110822 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Chris Rumsey, G.H., Smith, B: Turbulence modeling resource. http://turbmodels.larc.nasa.gov (2016)

  19. Breuer, M., Peller, N., Rapp, C., Manhart, M.: Flow over periodic hills–numerical and experimental study in a wide range of reynolds numbers. Comput. Fluids 38(2), 433–457 (2009)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Bentaleb, Y., Lardeau, S., Leschziner, M.A.: Large-eddy simulation of turbulent boundary layer separation from a rounded step. J. Turb. 13, N4 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Laval, J.-P., Marquillie, M.: Direct numerical simulations of converging–diverging channel flow. In: Progress in Wall Turbulence, Understanding and Modeling, pp 203–209. Springer (2011)

  22. Le, H., Moin, P., Kim, J.: Direct numerical simulation of turbulent flow over a backward-facing step. J. Fluid Mech. 330, 349–374 (1997)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Maaß, C., Schumann, U.: Direct numerical simulation of separated turbulent flow over a wavy boundary Flow Simulation with High-Performance Computers II, pp 227–241. Springer (1996)

  24. Cover, T., Hart, P.: Nearest neighbor pattern classification. IEEE Trans. 13, 21–27 (1967)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Mahalanobis, P.C.: On the generalized distance in statistics. Proc. Nat. Inst. Sci. (Calcutta) 2, 49–55 (1936)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Silverman, B.: Density Estimation for Statistics and Data Analysis. CRC Press (1986)

  27. Scott, D.W.: Multivariate Density Estimation: Theory, Practice, and Visualization. Wiley (2015)

  28. Launder, B., Sharma, B.: Application of the energy-dissipation model of turbulence to the calculation of flow near a spinning disc. Lett. Heat Mass Transfer 1(2), 131–137 (1974)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Weller, H.G., Tabor, G., Jasak, H., Fureby, C.: A tensorial approach to computational continuum mechanics using ject-oriented techniques. Comput. Phys. 12(6), 620–631 (1998)

  30. Thompson, R.L., Sampaio, L.E.B., de Braganċa Alves, F.A., Thais, L., Mompean, G.: A methodology to evaluate statistical errors in DNS data of plane channel flows. Comput. Fluids 130, 1–7 (2016)

  31. Poroseva, S.V., Colmenares F.J.D., Murman, S.M.: On the accuracy of RANS simulations with DNS data. Phys. Fluids 28(11), 115102 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Wang, J.-X., Wu, J.-L., Ling, J., Iaccarino, G., Xiao, H.: A comprehensive physics-informed machine learning framework for predictive turbulence modeling, submitted. Available at arXiv:1701.07102 (2017)

Download references

Acknowledgments

HX would like to thank Dr. Eric G. Paterson for numerous helpful discussions during this work.

Sandia National Laboratories is a multi-program laboratory managed and operated by Sandia Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Lockheed Martin Corporation, for the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration under contract DE-AC04-94AL85000. SAND2016-6700J.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Aerospace and Ocean Engineering, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, 24060, USA

    Jin-Long Wu, Jian-Xun Wang & Heng Xiao

  2. Thermal/Fluid Science and Engineering, Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore, CA, 94551, USA

    Julia Ling

Authors
  1. Jin-Long Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jian-Xun Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Heng Xiao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Julia Ling
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Heng Xiao.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interests

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wu, JL., Wang, JX., Xiao, H. et al. A Priori Assessment of Prediction Confidence for Data-Driven Turbulence Modeling. Flow Turbulence Combust 99, 25–46 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10494-017-9807-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10494-017-9807-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation