Despite tremendous progress seen in the computational fluid dynamics community for the past few decades, numerical tools are still too slow for the simulation of practical flow problems, consuming thousands or even millions of computational core-hours. To enable feasible multi-disciplinary analysis and design, the numerical techniques need to be accelerated by orders of magnitude. Reduced-order modeling has been considered one promising approach for such purposes. Recently, non-intrusive reduced-order modeling has drawn great interest in the scientific computing community due to its flexibility and efficiency and undergoes rapid development at present with different approaches emerging from various perspectives. In this paper, a brief review of non-intrusive reduced-order modeling in the context of fluid problems is performed involving three key aspects: i.e. dimension reduction of the solution space, surrogate models, and sampling strategies. Furthermore, non-intrusive reduced-order modelings regarding to some interesting topics such as unsteady flows, shock-dominating flows are also discussed. Finally, discussions on future development of non-intrusive reduced-order modeling for fluid problems are presented.
QuarteroniAManzoniANegriF. Reduced basis methods for partial differential equations: an introduction2015vol. 92Berlin, Germany: Springer.
2.
HesthavenJSRozzaGStammB, et al.Certified reduced basis methods for parametrized partial differential equations, Berlin, Germany: Springer, 2016.
3.
TairaKBruntonSLDawsonST, et al.Modal analysis of fluid flows: an overview. AIAA J2017; 55: 4013–4041.
4.
BennerPGugercinSWillcoxK. A survey of projection-based model reduction methods for parametric dynamical systems. SIAM Rev2015; 57: 483–531.
5.
BarraultMMadayYNguyenNC, et al.An ‘empirical interpolation’method: application to efficient reduced-basis discretization of partial differential equations. Comptes Rendus Math2004; 339: 667–672.
6.
GreplMAMadayYNguyenNC, et al.Efficient reduced-basis treatment of nonaffine and nonlinear partial differential equations. ESAIM: Math Model Numer Anal2007; 41: 575–605.
7.
ChaturantabutSSorensenDC. Nonlinear model reduction via discrete empirical interpolation. SIAM J Sci Comput2010; 32: 2737–2764.
8.
Rewienski M. A trajectory piecewise-linear approach to model order reduction of nonlinear dynamical systems. PhD Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, MA, 2003.
9.
AstridPWeilandSWillcoxK, et al.Missing point estimation in models described by proper orthogonal decomposition. IEEE Trans Autom Control2008; 53: 2237–2251.
10.
CarlbergKBou-MoslehCFarhatC. Efficient non-linear model reduction via a least-squares Petrov–Galerkin projection and compressive tensor approximations. Int J Numer Meth Eng2011; 86: 155–181.
11.
CarlbergKFarhatCCortialJ, et al.The gnat method for nonlinear model reduction: effective implementation and application to computational fluid dynamics and turbulent flows. J Comput Phys2013; 242: 623–647.
12.
Fodor IK. A survey of dimension reduction techniques. Technical report, Lawrence Livermore National Lab., CA, USA, 2002.
13.
FukunagaK. Introduction to statistical pattern recognition, Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier, 2013.
14.
NoackBRAfanasievKMorzyńskiM, et al.A hierarchy of low-dimensional models for the transient and post-transient cylinder wake. J Fluid Mech2003; 497: 335–363.
15.
Van Der MaatenLPostmaEVan den HerikJ. Dimensionality reduction: a comparative. J Mach Learn Res2009; 10: 13–13.
16.
JimenezLOLandgrebeDA, et al.Supervised classification in high-dimensional space: geometrical, statistical, and asymptotical properties of multivariate data. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybernet, Part C: Appl Rev1998; 28: 39–54.
17.
HotellingH. Analysis of a complex of statistical variables into principal components. J Educ Psychol1933; 24: 417–417.
18.
LumleyJLThe structure of inhomogeneous turbulent flows. In: YaglomAMTatarskiVI (eds). Atmospheric turbulence and radio propagation, Moscow: Nauka, 1967, pp. 166–178.
19.
EckartCYoungG. The approximation of one matrix by another of lower rank. Psychometrika1936; 1: 211–218.
20.
SchmidPJ. Dynamic mode decomposition of numerical and experimental data. J Fluid Mech2010; 656: 5–28.
21.
Lucia D, King P, Oxley M, et al. Reduced order modeling for a one-dimensional nozzle flow with moving shocks. In: 15th AIAA computational fluid dynamics conference, p.2602. Reston: America Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics.
22.
LuciaDJKingPIBeranPS. Reduced order modeling of a two-dimensional flow with moving shocks. Comput Fluids2003; 32: 917–938.
23.
RowleyCWMezićIBagheriS, et al.Spectral analysis of nonlinear flows. J Fluid Mech2009; 641: 115–127.
24.
MezićI. Analysis of fluid flows via spectral properties of the Koopman operator. Annu Rev Fluid Mech2013; 45: 357–378.
25.
TuJHRowleyCWLuchtenburgDM, et al.On dynamic mode decomposition: theory and applications. Am Inst Math Sci2014; 1: 391–421.
26.
HematiMSWilliamsMORowleyCW. Dynamic mode decomposition for large and streaming datasets. Phys Fluids2014; 26: 111701–111701.
27.
BelsonBATuJHRowleyCW. A parallelized model reduction library. ACM Trans Math Software (TOMS)2014; 40: 30–30.
28.
NoackBRStankiewiczWMorzyńskiM, et al.Recursive dynamic mode decomposition of transient and post-transient wake flows. J Fluid Mech2016; 809: 843–872.
BruntonSLBruntonBWProctorJL, et al.Chaos as an intermittently forced linear system. Nat Commun2017; 8: 19–19.
31.
DeMers D and Cottrell GW. Non-linear dimensionality reduction. In: Hanson SJ, Cowan JD and Giles CL (eds), Advances in neural information processing systems, 1993, pp.580–587. Vancouver: Neural Information Processing Systems Foundation, Inc. (NIPS).
32.
Lee K and Carlberg K. Model reduction of dynamical systems on nonlinear manifolds using deep convolutional autoencoders. In: SIAM conference on computational science and engineering, Spokane, WA, 2018;.
33.
WangYYaoHZhaoS. Auto-encoder based dimensionality reduction. Neurocomputing2016; 184: 232–242.
34.
HintonGESalakhutdinovRR. Reducing the dimensionality of data with neural networks. Science2006; 313: 504–507.
35.
BourlardHKampY. Auto-association by multilayer perceptrons and singular value decomposition. Biol Cybernet1988; 59: 291–294.
36.
KungSYDiamantarasKITaurJS. Adaptive principal component extraction (apex) and applications. IEEE Trans Signal Process1994; 42: 1202–1217.
37.
Gonzalez FJ and Balajewicz M. Deep convolutional recurrent autoencoders for learning low-dimensional feature dynamics of fluid systems. arXiv Preprint 2018; arXiv:1808.01346.
38.
Masci J, Meier U, Cireş an D, et al. Stacked convolutional auto-encoders for hierarchical feature extraction. In: Honkela T, Duch W, Girolami M and Kaski S (eds), International conference on artificial neural networks. Berlin, Germany: Springer, 2011, pp.52–59.
KruskalJB. Multidimensional scaling by optimizing goodness of fit to a nonmetric hypothesis. Psychometrika1964; 29: 1–27.
41.
CoxTFCoxMA. Multidimensional scaling, Boca Raton, FL: Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2000.
42.
Tenenbaum JB. Mapping a manifold of perceptual observations. In: Jordan MI, Kearns MJ and Solla SA (eds), Advances in neural information processing systems, 1998, pp.682–688. Vancouver: Neural Information Processing Systems Foundation, Inc. (NIPS).
43.
Weinberger KQ, Sha F and Saul LK. Learning a kernel matrix for nonlinear dimensionality reduction. In: Proceedings of the twenty-first international conference on machine learning. 2003, New York, NY: ACM, p.106.
44.
LafonSLeeAB. Diffusion maps and coarse-graining: a unified framework for dimensionality reduction, graph partitioning, and data set parameterization. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell2006; 28: 1393–1403.
45.
SchölkopfBSmolaAMüllerKR. Nonlinear component analysis as a kernel eigenvalue problem. Neural Comput1998; 10: 1299–1319.
46.
RoweisSTSaulLK. Nonlinear dimensionality reduction by locally linear embedding. Science2000; 290: 2323–2326.
47.
Belkin M and Niyogi P. Laplacian eigenmaps and spectral techniques for embedding and clustering. In: Dietterich TG, Becker S and Ghahramani Z (eds), Advances in neural information processing systems. pp.585–591. Vancouver: Neural Information Processing Systems Foundation, Inc. (NIPS).
48.
DonohoDLGrimesC. Hessian eigenmaps: locally linear embedding techniques for high-dimensional data. Proc Natl Acad Sci2003; 100: 5591–5596.
49.
ZhangZZhaH. Principal manifolds and nonlinear dimensionality reduction via tangent space alignment. SIAM J Sci Comput2004; 26: 313–338.
50.
Roweis S, et al. Automatic alignment of hidden representations. In: Sixteenth annual conference on neural information processing systems, vol. 15, Vancouver, Canada, pp.841–848.
51.
Brand M. Charting a manifold. In: Becker S, Thrun S and Obermayer K (eds), Advances in neural information processing systems. pp.985–992. Vancouver: Neural Information Processing Systems Foundation, Inc. (NIPS).
52.
BoxGEDraperNR. Empirical model-building and response surfaces, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 1987.
53.
Sun G and Wang S. A review of the artificial neural network surrogate modeling in aerodynamic design. Proc IMechE, Part G: J Aerosp Eng. 2019; 233: 5863–5872..
54.
Higham CF and Higham DJ. Deep learning: an introduction for applied mathematicians. arXiv Preprint 2018; arXiv:180105894.
55.
Ramachandran P, Zoph B and Le QV. Searching for activation functions. arXiv Preprint 2017; arXiv:171005941.
56.
Cybenko G. Continuous valued neural networks with two hidden layers are sufficient. Technical report, 1988.
57.
CybenkoG. Approximation by superpositions of a sigmoidal function. Math Control Signal Syst (MCSS)1989; 2: 303–314.
58.
EbdenM, et al.Gaussian processes for regression: a quick introduction. Website Robot Res Group Depart Eng Sci2008; 91: 424–436.
59.
MurphyK. Machine learning: a probabilistic perspective, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2012.
60.
Le Gratiet L. Multi-fidelity Gaussian process regression for computer experiments. PhD Thesis, Université Paris-Diderot, Paris, 2013.
61.
WaltonSHassanOMorganK. Reduced order modelling for unsteady fluid flow using proper orthogonal decomposition and radial basis functions. Appl Math Model2013; 37: 8930–8945.
62.
XiaoDFangFPainC, et al.Non-intrusive reduced-order modelling of the navier–stokes equations based on rbf interpolation. Int J Numer Meth Fluids2015; 79: 580–595.
63.
AudouzeCDe VuystFNairPB. Nonintrusive reduced-order modeling of parametrized time-dependent partial differential equations. Numer Meth Partial Diff Equat2013; 29: 1587–1628.
64.
FornbergBFlyerN. Accuracy of radial basis function interpolation and derivative approximations on 1-d infinite grids. Adv Comput Math2005; 23: 5–20.
65.
XiaoDFangFPainC, et al.A parameterized non-intrusive reduced order model and error analysis for general time-dependent nonlinear partial differential equations and its applications. Comp Meth Appl Mech Eng2017; 317: 868–889.
66.
Kast M, Guo M and Hesthaven JS. A non-intrusive multifidelity method for the reduced order modeling of nonlinear problems. Technical report, MATHICSE, EPFL, 2019.
67.
AlvarezMARosascoLLawrenceND, et al.Kernels for vector-valued functions: a review. Found Trends [textregistered] Mach Learn2012; 4: 195–266.
68.
O’HaganAKennedyMC. Predicting the output from a complex computer code when fast approximations are available. Biometrika2000; 87: 1–13.
69.
NarayanAGittelsonCXiuD. A stochastic collocation algorithm with multifidelity models. SIAM J Sci Comput2014; 36: A495–A521.
70.
YondoRAndrésEValeroE. A review on design of experiments and surrogate models in aircraft real-time and many-query aerodynamic analyses. Prog Aerosp Sci2018; 96: 23–61.
71.
LorenteLVegaJVelazquezA. Generation of aerodynamics databases using high-order singular value decomposition. J Aircr2008; 45: 1779–1788.
72.
CochranWG. Sampling techniques, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2007.
73.
LohrSL. Sampling: design and analysis, Toronto, Canada: Nelson Education, 2009.
74.
GentlemanWM. Implementing Clenshaw-Curtis quadrature, I methodology and experience. Commun ACM1972; 15: 337–342.
WangCHesthavenJSBaiJ, et al.Greedy nonintrusive reduced order model for fluid dynamics. AIAA J2018; 56: 4927–4943.
80.
GuoMHesthavenJS. Reduced order modeling for nonlinear structural analysis using Gaussian process regression. Comp Meth Appl Mech Eng2018; 341: 807–826.
81.
BusingerPGolubGH. Handbook series linear algebra. Numer Math1965; 7: 269–276.
82.
YuJYanCJiangZ, et al.Adaptive non-intrusive reduced order modeling for compressible flows. J Comput Phys2019; 397: 108855–108855.
83.
WangQHesthavenJSRayD. Non-intrusive reduced order modeling of unsteady flows using artificial neural networks with application to a combustion problem. J Comput Phys2019; 384: 289–307.
84.
GuoMHesthavenJS. Data-driven reduced order modeling for time-dependent problems. Comput Meth Appl Mech Eng2019; 345: 75–99.
85.
PeherstorferBWillcoxK. Data-driven operator inference for nonintrusive projection-based model reduction. Comp Meth Appl Mech Eng2016; 306: 196–215.
86.
XiaoDHeaneyCFangF, et al.A domain decomposition non-intrusive reduced order model for turbulent flows. Comp Fluid2019; 182: 15–27.
87.
AlonsoDVegaJVelazquezA. Reduced-order model for viscous aerodynamic flow past an airfoil. AIAA J2010; 48: 1946–1958.
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
