Mathematics
in Geosciences, September 2001 - June 2002
Spring
2002
IMA Tutorial:
Inverse
Problems and the Quantification of Uncertainty
April
19, 2002
Organizers:
Philip
B. Stark
Department
of Statistics
University
of California Berkeley
stark@stat.berkeley.edu
William
W. Symes
Department
of Computational and Applied Mathematics
Rice
University
symes@caam.rice.edu
Material
from Talks Audio
Recordings
Schedule
April
19, 2002, 9:30-11:00am, Lind 409
Deterministic
measures of uncertainty in inverse problems
Slides
William W. Symes
Abstract:
Inverse problems are often formulated as functional equations
or optimization problems. Thus the estimation of errors in the
solutions amounts to the study of error propagation for these
two classes of mathematical problems, at least from the deterministic
perspective. A solution algorithm produces a solution estimate
in which data error translates into both intrinsic (to the problem)
and algorithmic (or numerical) estimation error. All real world
data exhibits both data uncertainty (measurement error) and
model incompatibility. Therefore any solution estimate which
matches the data with some tolerance must be accepted as a "solution".
The sets of solutions defined in this way are often very large,
and the problem becomes one of determining what inference can
be drawn about common features of the models which these solutions
represent. Several factors have a large influence on the quality
of the answer to this question, for example the choice of data
misfit measure, the amount of misfit tolerated, and the type
of additional data supplied to specify an acceptable model.
These influences are fairly well understood for linear inverse
problems, in which model and predicted data are linearly related.
I will review the linear theory and present some examples of
its application. Deterministic and statistical approaches to
error estimation for linear inverse problems are parallel in
several respects, and I will note some of the similarities and
differences. Nonlinear inverse problems can exhibit a much wilder
range of error propagation effects, many of which are at present
only poorly understood. Some of the additional subtlety supplied
by nonlinearity is nicely illustrated by examples from seismology.
April
19, 2002, 2:00-3:00pm, Lind 409
Statistical measures
of uncertainty in inverse problems
Slides:
html
pdf
powerpoint
Philip
B. Stark
Abstract: Inverse problems
can be viewed as special cases of statistical estimation problems.
From that perspective, one often can study inverse problems
using standard statistical measures of uncertainty, such as
bias, variance, mean squared error and other measures of risk,
confidence sets, and so on. It is useful to distinguish between
the intrinsic uncertainty of an inverse problem and the uncertainty
of applying any particular technique for "solving" the inverse
problem. The intrinsic uncertainty depends crucially on the
prior constraints on the unknown (including prior probability
distributions in the case of Bayesian analyses), on the forward
operator, on the statistics of the observational errors, and
on the nature of the properties of the unknown one wishes to
estimate. I will try to convey some geometrical intuition for
uncertainty, and the relation between the intrinsic uncertainty
of linear inverse problems and the uncertainty of some common
techniques applied to them.
Material
from Talks
Audio
Recordings
LIST OF CONFIRMED PARTICIPANTS
| Name |
Department |
Affiliation |
| Santiago Betelu |
Mathematics |
University of North Texas |
| Jamylle Carter |
|
Institute for Mathematics & its Applications |
| Christine Cheng |
Institute for Mathematics & its Applications |
University of Minnesota |
| Dacian Daescu |
University of Minnesota |
Institute for Mathematics and its Applications |
| Gregory S. Duane |
University of Minnesota |
Institute for Mathematics and its Applications |
| Michael Efroimsky |
University of Minnesota |
Institute for Mathematics and its Applications |
| Selim Esedoglu |
|
Institute for Mathematics & its Applications |
| Daniel Kern |
|
|
| Anna Mazzucato |
Mathematics |
Yale University |
| Aurelia Minut |
University of Minnesota |
Institute for Mathematics and its Applications |
| M. Yvonne Ou |
University of Minnesota |
Institute for Mathematics and its Applications |
| Jianliang Qian |
|
Institute for Mathematics & its Applications |
| Professor Philip Stark |
Statistics |
University of California, Berkeley |
| Toshio Yoshikawa |
University of Minnesota |
Institute for Mathematics and its Applications |
2001-2002
IMA Thematic Year on Mathematics in the Geosciences
|