1 / 21

Presented at the 6 th Annual CMAS Conference Friday Center, UNC-Chapel Hill October 1-3, 2007

Evaluation of Emission Control Strategies for Regional Scale Air Quality: Performance of Direct and Surrogate Techniques. Presented at the 6 th Annual CMAS Conference Friday Center, UNC-Chapel Hill October 1-3, 2007. S. Isukapalli, S. Wang, S. Napalenok* T. Kindap, and P. Georgopoulos.

finnea
Download Presentation

Presented at the 6 th Annual CMAS Conference Friday Center, UNC-Chapel Hill October 1-3, 2007

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Evaluation of Emission Control Strategies for Regional Scale Air Quality: Performance of Direct and Surrogate Techniques Presented at the 6th Annual CMAS Conference Friday Center, UNC-Chapel Hill October 1-3, 2007 S. Isukapalli, S. Wang, S. Napalenok* T. Kindap, and P. Georgopoulos Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory (CCL) Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute (EOHSI)A Joint Institute of UMDNJ-RW Johnson Medical School and Rutgers University170 Frelinghuysen Road, Piscataway, NJ 08854 *Atmospheric Sciences Modeling Division, Air Resources Laboratory, NOAA in partnership with the USEPA

  2. Acknowledgments • Alper Unal, WRI • Talat Odman and Yongtao Hu, Georgia Institute of Technology • USEPA (Funding for Center for Exposure and Risk Modeling) • NJDEP (Base funding for the Ozone Research Center) • OTC Modeling Group Centers (Emissions inventories, Meteorology, etc.) CMAS Conference, 2007 2

  3. Overview • Surrogate Modeling Techniques • HDMR • DDM • Automatic Differentiation • Response Surface Modeling • Case Study • Emissions and Regions • Estimates vs Brute Force • Results and Discussion CMAS Conference, 2007 3

  4. Use of surrogate models for emission control analysis • Emissions control analysis is a multi-dimensional problem • Geographic regions [states/counties, etc.] • Types of emissions [point, biogenic, area, mobile, etc.] • Primary emissions [NOx, VOC, etc.] • Some times, multi-objective problems • Ozone, PM2.5, etc. • Direct model simulation is expensive • 2 hours/day for OTC-12 domain simulation (8 Opteron nodes) • Surrogate models can provide significant speedups • Construction of surrogate models is often parallelizable CMAS Conference, 2007 4

  5. Use of surrogate models for emission control analysis • Can provide a “Fast Equivalent Operational Model” (FEOM) • Can also be used in Uncertainty Propagation CMAS Conference, 2007 5

  6. Use of surrogate models for emission control analysis • Several techniques exist for surrogate modeling • Response Surface Methods (Deterministic and Stochastic) • High Dimensional Model Representations (HDMR) • Local Gradient-Based Methods • Decoupled Direct Method (DDM) • Adjoint Sensitivity Analysis Method • Automatic Differentiation • Features • Black-box models (Response Surface; HDMR; etc.) • Some changes to code (Automatic Differentiation) • Extensive changes to model code/new modules (DDM; Adjoint Sensitivity) CMAS Conference, 2007 6

  7. High Dimensional Model Representation (HDMR) System (a mathematical model; e.g. CMAQ): Input I: Output O: • HDMR expresses model outputs as expansions of correlated functions: CMAS Conference, 2007 7

  8. The expressions of HDMR component functions are optimal choices for the output f (x) over the desired domain of the input variable space such that the HDMR expansion converges very rapidly • Cut-HDMR: • In practice, the HDMR expansion functions are represented as a set of low dimensional look-up tables CMAS Conference, 2007 8

  9. Decomposition of variance: • The total variance s2(g) attributable to all inputs can be decomposed into individual contributions CMAS Conference, 2007 9

  10. Automatic Differentiation (www.autodiff.org) Chain Rule on Computer Instructions dy(1) = 0.0 y(1) = 1.0 dy(2) = 0.0 y(2) = 1.0 do i = 1,n if (x(i) > 0.0) then dtemp = y(1)*dx(i) + x(i)*dy(1) temp = x(i) * y(1) dy(1) = y(1)*dtemp + temp*dy(1) y(1) = temp * y(1) else dtemp = y(2)*dx(i) + x(i)*dy(2) temp = x(i) * y(2) dy(2) = y(2)*dtemp + temp*dy(2) y(2) = temp * y(2) endif enddo y(1) = 1.0 y(2) = 1.0 do i = 1,n if (x(i) > 0.0) then y(1) = x(i) * y(1) * y(1) else y(2) = x(i) * y(2) * y(2) endif enddo Problems: ADIFOR does not support F90/F95 Commercial tools unproven CMAS Conference, 2007 10

  11. Decoupled Direct Method (DDM) • CMAQ-DDM 4.5 with CB4, Aero4, AQ • Serial version from Talat Odman, Georgia Inst. of Technology • Parallel version from Sergey Napalenok, USEPA CMAS Conference, 2007 11

  12. Domain for the Case Study CMAS Conference, 2007 12

  13. Case Study • Impact of reductions in NOx emissions from five states: • DE, MD, NJ, NY, and PA • Base Case: • OTC12 BaseB • Evaluate performance of HDMR and DDM as surrogate models • 10% overall • 25% overall • 75% overall except PA (zero reduction) CMAS Conference, 2007 13

  14. Base Case (08/01/2002; Hours 14-17) CMAS Conference, 2007 14

  15. 10% overall reduction; HDMR (08/01/2002; Hours 14-17) CMAS Conference, 2007 15

  16. 25% overall reduction; HDMR (08/01/2002; Hours 14-17) CMAS Conference, 2007 16

  17. 75% overall reduction [except PA]; HDMR (08/01/2002; Hours 14-17) CMAS Conference, 2007 17

  18. 10% overall reduction; DDM (08/01/2002; Hours 14-17) CMAS Conference, 2007 18

  19. 25% overall reduction; DDM (08/01/2002; Hours 14-17) CMAS Conference, 2007 19

  20. 75% overall reduction [except PA]; DDM (08/01/2002; Hours 14-17) CMAS Conference, 2007 20

  21. Discussion • Approximations appear to break at about 25% changes in emissions • Can be used for screening purposes for small variations • Potential mix of “global” and “gradient-based” sensitivities CMAS Conference, 2007 21

More Related