Verification and validation benchmarks.

Verification and validation (V&V) are the primary means to assess the accuracy and reliability of computational simulations. V&V methods and procedures have fundamentally improved the credibility of simulations in several high-consequence fields, such as nuclear reactor safety, underground nuclear waste storage, and nuclear weapon safety. Although the terminology is not uniform across engineering disciplines, code verification deals with assessing the reliability of the software coding, and solution verification deals with assessing the numerical accuracy of the solution to a computational model. Validation addresses the physics modeling accuracy of a computational simulation by comparing the computational results with experimental data. Code verification benchmarks and validation benchmarks have been constructed for a number of years in every field of computational simulation. However, no comprehensive guidelines have been proposed for the construction and use of V&V benchmarks. For example, the field of nuclear reactor safety has not focused on code verification benchmarks, but it has placed great emphasis on developing validation benchmarks. Many of these validation benchmarks are closely related to the operations of actual reactors at near-safety-critical conditions, as opposed to being more fundamental-physics benchmarks. This paper presents recommendations for the effective design and use of code verification benchmarks based on manufactured solutions, classical analytical solutions, and highly accurate numerical solutions. In addition, this paper presents recommendations for the design and use of validation benchmarks, highlighting the careful design of building-block experiments, the estimation of experimental measurement uncertainty for both inputs and outputs to the code, validation metrics, and the role of model calibration in validation. It is argued that the understanding of predictive capability of a computational model is built on the level of achievement in V&V activities, how closely related the V&V benchmarks are to the actual application of interest, and the quantification of uncertainties related to the application of interest

On the role of code comparisons in verification and validation.

This report presents a perspective on the role of code comparison activities in verification and validation. We formally define the act of code comparison as the Code Comparison Principle (CCP) and investigate its application in both verification and validation. One of our primary conclusions is that the use of code comparisons for validation is improper and dangerous. We also conclude that while code comparisons may be argued to provide a beneficial component in code verification activities, there are higher quality code verification tasks that should take precedence. Finally, we provide a process for application of the CCP that we believe is minimal for achieving benefit in verification processes

Ideas underlying quantification of margins and uncertainties(QMU): a white paper.

This report describes key ideas underlying the application of Quantification of Margins and Uncertainties (QMU) to nuclear weapons stockpile lifecycle decisions at Sandia National Laboratories. While QMU is a broad process and methodology for generating critical technical information to be used in stockpile management, this paper emphasizes one component, which is information produced by computational modeling and simulation. In particular, we discuss the key principles of developing QMU information in the form of Best Estimate Plus Uncertainty, the need to separate aleatory and epistemic uncertainty in QMU, and the risk-informed decision making that is best suited for decisive application of QMU. The paper is written at a high level, but provides a systematic bibliography of useful papers for the interested reader to deepen their understanding of these ideas

Modeling and simulation technology readiness levels.

This report summarizes the results of an effort to establish a framework for assigning and communicating technology readiness levels (TRLs) for the modeling and simulation (ModSim) capabilities at Sandia National Laboratories. This effort was undertaken as a special assignment for the Weapon Simulation and Computing (WSC) program office led by Art Hale, and lasted from January to September 2006. This report summarizes the results, conclusions, and recommendations, and is intended to help guide the program office in their decisions about the future direction of this work. The work was broken out into several distinct phases, starting with establishing the scope and definition of the assignment. These are characterized in a set of key assertions provided in the body of this report. Fundamentally, the assignment involved establishing an intellectual framework for TRL assignments to Sandia's modeling and simulation capabilities, including the development and testing of a process to conduct the assignments. To that end, we proposed a methodology for both assigning and understanding the TRLs, and outlined some of the restrictions that need to be placed on this process and the expected use of the result. One of the first assumptions we overturned was the notion of a ''static'' TRL--rather we concluded that problem context was essential in any TRL assignment, and that leads to dynamic results (i.e., a ModSim tool's readiness level depends on how it is used, and by whom). While we leveraged the classic TRL results from NASA, DoD, and Sandia's NW program, we came up with a substantially revised version of the TRL definitions, maintaining consistency with the classic level definitions and the Predictive Capability Maturity Model (PCMM) approach. In fact, we substantially leveraged the foundation the PCMM team provided, and augmented that as needed. Given the modeling and simulation TRL definitions and our proposed assignment methodology, we conducted four ''field trials'' to examine how this would work in practice. The results varied substantially, but did indicate that establishing the capability dependencies and making the TRL assignments was manageable and not particularly time consuming. The key differences arose in perceptions of how this information might be used, and what value it would have (opinions ranged from negative to positive value). The use cases and field trial results are included in this report. Taken together, the results suggest that we can make reasonably reliable TRL assignments, but that using those without the context of the information that led to those results (i.e., examining the measures suggested by the PCMM table, and extended for ModSim TRL purposes) produces an oversimplified result--that is, you cannot really boil things down to just a scalar value without losing critical information

Verification, validation, and predictive capability in computational engineering and physics.

Developers of computer codes, analysts who use the codes, and decision makers who rely on the results of the analyses face a critical question: How should confidence in modeling and simulation be critically assessed? Verification and validation (V&V) of computational simulations are the primary methods for building and quantifying this confidence. Briefly, verification is the assessment of the accuracy of the solution to a computational model. Validation is the assessment of the accuracy of a computational simulation by comparison with experimental data. In verification, the relationship of the simulation to the real world is not an issue. In validation, the relationship between computation and the real world, i.e., experimental data, is the issue

R&D for computational cognitive and social models : foundations for model evaluation through verification and validation (final LDRD report).

Sandia National Laboratories is investing in projects that aim to develop computational modeling and simulation applications that explore human cognitive and social phenomena. While some of these modeling and simulation projects are explicitly research oriented, others are intended to support or provide insight for people involved in high consequence decision-making. This raises the issue of how to evaluate computational modeling and simulation applications in both research and applied settings where human behavior is the focus of the model: when is a simulation 'good enough' for the goals its designers want to achieve? In this report, we discuss two years' worth of review and assessment of the ASC program's approach to computational model verification and validation, uncertainty quantification, and decision making. We present a framework that extends the principles of the ASC approach into the area of computational social and cognitive modeling and simulation. In doing so, we argue that the potential for evaluation is a function of how the modeling and simulation software will be used in a particular setting. In making this argument, we move from strict, engineering and physics oriented approaches to V&V to a broader project of model evaluation, which asserts that the systematic, rigorous, and transparent accumulation of evidence about a model's performance under conditions of uncertainty is a reasonable and necessary goal for model evaluation, regardless of discipline. How to achieve the accumulation of evidence in areas outside physics and engineering is a significant research challenge, but one that requires addressing as modeling and simulation tools move out of research laboratories and into the hands of decision makers. This report provides an assessment of our thinking on ASC Verification and Validation, and argues for further extending V&V research in the physical and engineering sciences toward a broader program of model evaluation in situations of high consequence decision-making

Post-processing V&V level II ASC milestone (2360) results.

The 9/30/2007 ASC Level 2 Post-Processing V&V Milestone (Milestone 2360) contains functionality required by the user community for certain verification and validation tasks. These capabilities include loading of edge and face data on an Exodus mesh, run-time computation of an exact solution to a verification problem, delivery of results data from the server to the client, computation of an integral-based error metric, simultaneous loading of simulation and test data, and comparison of that data using visual and quantitative methods. The capabilities were tested extensively by performing a typical ALEGRA HEDP verification task. In addition, a number of stretch criteria were met including completion of a verification task on a 13 million element mesh

Toward a more rigorous application of margins and uncertainties within the nuclear weapons life cycle : a Sandia perspective.

This paper presents the conceptual framework that is being used to define quantification of margins and uncertainties (QMU) for application in the nuclear weapons (NW) work conducted at Sandia National Laboratories. The conceptual framework addresses the margins and uncertainties throughout the NW life cycle and includes the definition of terms related to QMU and to figures of merit. Potential applications of QMU consist of analyses based on physical data and on modeling and simulation. Appendix A provides general guidelines for addressing cases in which significant and relevant physical data are available for QMU analysis. Appendix B gives the specific guidance that was used to conduct QMU analyses in cycle 12 of the annual assessment process. Appendix C offers general guidelines for addressing cases in which appropriate models are available for use in QMU analysis. Appendix D contains an example that highlights the consequences of different treatments of uncertainty in model-based QMU analyses

Penetrator reliability investigation and design exploration : from conventional design processes to innovative uncertainty-capturing algorithms.

This project focused on research and algorithmic development in optimization under uncertainty (OUU) problems driven by earth penetrator (EP) designs. While taking into account uncertainty, we addressed three challenges in current simulation-based engineering design and analysis processes. The first challenge required leveraging small local samples, already constructed by optimization algorithms, to build effective surrogate models. We used Gaussian Process (GP) models to construct these surrogates. We developed two OUU algorithms using 'local' GPs (OUU-LGP) and one OUU algorithm using 'global' GPs (OUU-GGP) that appear competitive or better than current methods. The second challenge was to develop a methodical design process based on multi-resolution, multi-fidelity models. We developed a Multi-Fidelity Bayesian Auto-regressive process (MF-BAP). The third challenge involved the development of tools that are computational feasible and accessible. We created MATLAB{reg_sign} and initial DAKOTA implementations of our algorithms

Risk assessment of climate systems for national security.

Climate change, through drought, flooding, storms, heat waves, and melting Arctic ice, affects the production and flow of resource within and among geographical regions. The interactions among governments, populations, and sectors of the economy require integrated assessment based on risk, through uncertainty quantification (UQ). This project evaluated the capabilities with Sandia National Laboratories to perform such integrated analyses, as they relate to (inter)national security. The combining of the UQ results from climate models with hydrological and economic/infrastructure impact modeling appears to offer the best capability for national security risk assessments