# Analysis of the Stochastic Quarter-Five Spot Problem Using Polynomial Chaos

^{1}

^{2}

^{*}

## Abstract

**:**

## 1. Introduction

## 2. Mathematical Statement of the Quarter-Five Spot Problem

#### 2.1. The Deterministic Problem

#### 2.2. The Stochastic Problem

## 3. Solution Implementation

#### 3.1. The Deterministic Problem

#### Numerical Example

#### 3.2. The Stochastic Quarter-Five Spot Problem

- First: Using PCE

- Second: Using KL expansion

## 4. Results

#### 4.1. Case of PCE Only

#### 4.2. Case of KL with PCE

## 5. Conclusions

## Author Contributions

## Funding

## Conflicts of Interest

## References

- Shenoy, A.V. Non-Newtonian Fluid Heat Transfer in Porous Media. In Advances in Heat Transfer; Hartnett, J.P., Irvine, T.F., Cho, Y.I., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1994; Volume 24, pp. 101–190. [Google Scholar]
- El-Beltagy, M.A. A practical comparison between the spectral techniques in solving the SDEs. Eng. Comput.
**2019**, 36, 2369–2402. [Google Scholar] - Le Maître, O.; Knio, O. Spectral Methods for Uncertainty Quantification: With Applications to Computational Fluid Dynamics; Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Giles, M.B. Multilevel Monte Carlo Path Simulation. Op. Res.
**2008**, 56, 607–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Doucet, A.; de Freitas, N.; Gordon, N. An Introduction to Sequential Monte Carlo Methods. In Sequential Monte Carlo Methods in Practice; Doucet, A., de Freitas, N., Gordon, N., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2001; pp. 3–14. [Google Scholar]
- Caflisch, R.E. Monte Carlo and quasi-Monte Carlo methods. Acta Numer.
**1998**, 7, 1–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Gelhar, L.W. Stochastic subsurface hydrology from theory to applications. Water Resour. Res.
**1986**, 22, 135S–145S. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ketabchi, H.; Ataie-Ashtiani, B. Review: Coastal groundwater optimization—advances, challenges, and practical solutions. Hydrogeol. J.
**2015**, 23, 1129–1154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Razavi, S.; Tolson, B.A.; Burn, D.H. Review of surrogate modeling in water resources. Water Resour. Res.
**2012**, 48, W07401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Frangos, M.; Marzouk, Y.; Willcox, K.; van Bloemen Waanders, B. Surrogate and Reduced-Order Modeling: A Comparison of Approaches for Large-Scale Statistical Inverse Problems. In Computational Methods for Large-Scale Inverse Problems and Quantification of Uncertainty; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2010; pp. 123–149. [Google Scholar]
- Ghanem, R. Ingredients for a general purpose stochastic finite elements implementation. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng.
**1999**, 168, 19–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Xiu, D.; Em Karniadakis, G. Modeling uncertainty in steady state diffusion problems via generalized polynomial chaos. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng.
**2002**, 191, 4927–4948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Cameron, R.H.; Martin, W.T. The Orthogonal Development of Non-Linear Functionals in Series of Fourier-Hermite Functionals. Ann. Math.
**1947**, 48, 385–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Xiu, D.; Karniadakis, G.E. The Wiener-Askey Polynomial Chaos for Stochastic Differential Equations. SIAM J. Sci. Comput.
**2002**, 24, 619–644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Askey, R.; Wilson, J. Some basic hypergeometric orthogonal polynomials that generalize Jacobi polynomials. Mem. Am. Math. Soc.
**1985**, 54, 1–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Paulson, J.; Buehler, E.; Mesbah, A. Arbitrary Polynomial Chaos for Uncertainty Propagation of Correlated Random Variables in Dynamic Systems. IFAC PapersOnLine
**2017**, 50, 3548–3553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Oladyshkin, S.; Nowak, W. Data-driven uncertainty quantification using the arbitrary polynomial chaos expansion. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf.
**2012**, 106, 179–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Loève, M. Probability Theory I; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1987. [Google Scholar]
- Sapsis, T.P.; Lermusiaux, P.F.J. Dynamically orthogonal field equations for continuous stochastic dynamical systems. Phys. D Nonlinear Phenom.
**2009**, 238, 2347–2360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Cheng, M.; Hou, T.Y.; Zhang, Z. A dynamically bi-orthogonal method for time-dependent stochastic partial differential equations I: Derivation and algorithms. J. Comput. Phys.
**2013**, 242, 843–868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Chavent, G.; Jaffre, J. Mathematical Models and Finite Elements in Reservoir Simulation; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1986. [Google Scholar]
- Hasle, G.; Lie, K.; Quak, E. Geometric Modelling, Numerical Simulation, and Optimization: Applied Mathematics at SINTEF; Springer: Heidelberg, Germany, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, D. Stochastic Methods for Flow in Porous Media: Coping with Uncertainties; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- El-Beltagy, M.A.; Wafa, M.I. Stochastic 2D incompressible Navier-Stokes solver using the vorticity-stream function formulation. J. Appl. Math.
**2013**, 2013, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Augustin, F.; Gilg, A.; Paffrath, M.; Rentrop, P.; Wever, U. Polynomial chaos for the approximation of uncertainties: Chances and limits. Eur. J. Appl. Math.
**2008**, 19, 149–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Gentle, J.E. Numerical Linear Algebra for Applications in Statistics; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- Lie, K.-A. An Introduction to Reservoir Simulation Using MATLAB; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Pollock, D.W. Semianalytical Computation of Path Lines for Finite-Difference Models. Groundwater
**1988**, 26, 743–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Noor, A.; Barnawi, A.; Nour, R.; Assiri, A.; El-Beltagy, M. Analysis of the Stochastic Population Model with Random Parameters. Entropy
**2020**, 22, 562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Paleologos, E.K.; Avanidou, T.; Mylopoulos, N. Stochastic analysis and prioritization of the influence of parameter uncertainty on the predicted pressure profile in heterogeneous, unsaturated soils. J. Hazard. Mater.
**2006**, 136, 137–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Kourakos, G.; Harter, T. Parallel simulation of groundwater non-point source pollution using algebraic multigrid preconditioners. Comput. Geosci.
**2014**, 18, 851–867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Crevillén-García, D.; Leung, P.K.; Rodchanarowan, A.; Shah, A.A. Uncertainty Quantification for Flow and Transport in Highly Heterogeneous Porous Media Based on Simultaneous Stochastic Model Dimensionality Reduction. Transp. Porous Media
**2019**, 126, 79–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]

**Figure 1.**Solution of the quarter-five spot problem on a $32\times 32\text{}$ uniform grid. The plot shows the pressure distribution on each point in the grid, where the highest pressure values are in the bottom left corner and the pressure decreases gradually until it reaches the lowest value at the top right corner.

**Figure 3.**(

**a**) The pressure mean solution using MC method. (

**b**) The percentage of difference of solutions between MC and PCE methods.

**Table 1.**$\text{}{\psi}_{i}\left(\eta \right)$ used to evaluate the PC coefficients ${k}_{i}\left(x\right)$ [11].

${\mathit{\psi}}_{\mathit{i}}\left(\mathit{\xi}\right)$ | ${\mathit{\psi}}_{\mathit{i}}\left(\mathit{\eta}\right)$ | ${\mathit{\psi}}_{\mathit{i}}\left(\mathit{\eta}\right)$ |
---|---|---|

${\xi}_{i}$ | ${\eta}_{i}+{z}_{i}$ | ${z}_{i}$ |

${\xi}_{i}{\xi}_{j}-{\delta}_{ij}$ | $\left({\eta}_{i}+{z}_{i}\right)\left({\eta}_{j}+{z}_{j}\right)\_-{\delta}_{ij}$ | ${z}_{i}{z}_{j}$ |

${\xi}_{i}{\xi}_{j}{\xi}_{k}-{\xi}_{i}{\delta}_{jk}-{\xi}_{j}{\delta}_{ik}-{\xi}_{k}{\delta}_{ij}$ | $\left({\eta}_{i}+{z}_{i}\right)\left({\eta}_{j}+{z}_{j}\right)\left({\eta}_{j}+{z}_{j}\right)\_-{z}_{i}{\delta}_{jk}-{z}_{j}{\delta}_{ik}-{z}_{k}{\delta}_{ij}$ | ${z}_{i}{z}_{j}{z}_{k}$ |

${\mathit{k}}_{1}=0$ | ${\mathit{k}}_{2}=0$ | ${\mathit{k}}_{1}\&{\mathit{k}}_{2}\text{}\mathit{n}\mathit{o}\mathit{n}\text{}\mathit{z}\mathit{e}\mathit{r}\mathit{o}$ | |
---|---|---|---|

Mean difference percentage | 0.0035 | 0.0039 | 0.0031 |

Variance difference percentage | 2.56 | 2.61 | 2.52 |

$\mathbf{Correlation}\text{}\mathbf{Length}\text{}\mathit{l}$ | $\mathit{l}=0.1$ | $\mathit{l}=0.3$ | $\mathit{l}=0.5$ | $\mathit{l}=1$ |
---|---|---|---|---|

Number of terms for convergence | $>12$ | 12 | 8 | 5 |

Method | $\mathbf{MSE}\%\text{}\mathbf{at}\text{}\mathit{\sigma}=0.1$ | $\mathbf{MSE}\%\text{}\mathbf{at}\text{}\mathit{\sigma}=0.5$ | $\mathbf{MSE}\%\text{}\mathbf{at}\text{}\mathit{\sigma}=1$ |
---|---|---|---|

PCE | $0.02$ | 0.4 | 1 |

KL-PCE $l=0.1$ | 0.01 | 0.5 | 0.1 |

KL-PCE $l=0.3$ | 0.02 | 0.3 | 0.9 |

KL-PCE $l=0.5$ | 0.1 | 0.8 | 4 |

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

## Share and Cite

**MDPI and ACS Style**

AbdelFattah, H.; Al-Johani, A.; El-Beltagy, M.
Analysis of the Stochastic Quarter-Five Spot Problem Using Polynomial Chaos. *Molecules* **2020**, *25*, 3370.
https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules25153370

**AMA Style**

AbdelFattah H, Al-Johani A, El-Beltagy M.
Analysis of the Stochastic Quarter-Five Spot Problem Using Polynomial Chaos. *Molecules*. 2020; 25(15):3370.
https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules25153370

**Chicago/Turabian Style**

AbdelFattah, Hesham, Amnah Al-Johani, and Mohamed El-Beltagy.
2020. "Analysis of the Stochastic Quarter-Five Spot Problem Using Polynomial Chaos" *Molecules* 25, no. 15: 3370.
https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules25153370