Sparsity-promoting Bayesian approximation error method for compensating for the mismodeling of optical properties in fluorescence molecular tomography

2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (15) ◽  
pp. 3024 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wenhao Xie ◽  
Yong Deng ◽  
Dongmei Yan ◽  
Xiaoquan Yang ◽  
Qingming Luo
2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (12) ◽  
pp. 148 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niko Hänninen ◽  
Aki Pulkkinen ◽  
Tanja Tarvainen

Quantitative photoacoustic tomography is a novel imaging method which aims to reconstruct optical parameters of an imaged target based on initial pressure distribution, which can be obtained from ultrasound measurements. In this paper, a method for reconstructing the optical parameters in a Bayesian framework is presented. In addition, evaluating the credibility of the estimates is studied. Furthermore, a Bayesian approximation error method is utilized to compensate the modeling errors caused by coarse discretization of the forward model. The reconstruction method and the reliability of the credibility estimates are investigated with two-dimensional numerical simulations. The results suggest that the Bayesian approach can be used to obtain accurate estimates of the optical parameters and the credibility estimates of these parameters. Furthermore, the Bayesian approximation error method can be used to compensate for the modeling errors caused by a coarse discretization, which can be used to reduce the computational costs of the reconstruction procedure. In addition, taking the modeling errors into account can increase the reliability of the credibility estimates.


2013 ◽  
Vol 133 (5) ◽  
pp. 3230-3230 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janne Koponen ◽  
Tomi Huttunen ◽  
Tanja Tarvainen ◽  
Jari Kaipio

Author(s):  
Ahmed Abou-Elyazied Abdallh ◽  
Luc Dupré

Purpose – Magnetic material properties of an electromagnetic device (EMD) can be recovered by solving a coupled experimental numerical inverse problem. In order to ensure the highest possible accuracy of the inverse problem solution, all physics of the EMD need to be perfectly modeled using a complex numerical model. However, these fine models demand a high computational time. Alternatively, less accurate coarse models can be used with a demerit of the high expected recovery errors. The purpose of this paper is to present an efficient methodology to reduce the effect of stochastic modeling errors in the inverse problem solution. Design/methodology/approach – The recovery error in the electromagnetic inverse problem solution is reduced using the Bayesian approximation error approach coupled with an adaptive Kriging-based model. The accuracy of the forward model is assessed and adapted a priori using the cross-validation technique. Findings – The adaptive Kriging-based model seems to be an efficient technique for modeling EMDs used in inverse problems. Moreover, using the proposed methodology, the recovery error in the electromagnetic inverse problem solution is largely reduced in a relatively small computational time and memory storage. Originality/value – The proposed methodology is capable of not only improving the accuracy of the inverse problem solution, but also reducing the computational time as well as the memory storage. Furthermore, to the best of the authors knowledge, it is the first time to combine the adaptive Kriging-based model with the Bayesian approximation error approach for the stochastic modeling error reduction.


2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 1731-1750
Author(s):  
Olalekan Babaniyi ◽  
Ruanui Nicholson ◽  
Umberto Villa ◽  
Noémi Petra

Abstract. We consider the problem of inferring the basal sliding coefficient field for an uncertain Stokes ice sheet forward model from synthetic surface velocity measurements. The uncertainty in the forward model stems from unknown (or uncertain) auxiliary parameters (e.g., rheology parameters). This inverse problem is posed within the Bayesian framework, which provides a systematic means of quantifying uncertainty in the solution. To account for the associated model uncertainty (error), we employ the Bayesian approximation error (BAE) approach to approximately premarginalize simultaneously over both the noise in measurements and uncertainty in the forward model. We also carry out approximative posterior uncertainty quantification based on a linearization of the parameter-to-observable map centered at the maximum a posteriori (MAP) basal sliding coefficient estimate, i.e., by taking the Laplace approximation. The MAP estimate is found by minimizing the negative log posterior using an inexact Newton conjugate gradient method. The gradient and Hessian actions to vectors are efficiently computed using adjoints. Sampling from the approximate covariance is made tractable by invoking a low-rank approximation of the data misfit component of the Hessian. We study the performance of the BAE approach in the context of three numerical examples in two and three dimensions. For each example, the basal sliding coefficient field is the parameter of primary interest which we seek to infer, and the rheology parameters (e.g., the flow rate factor or the Glen's flow law exponent coefficient field) represent so-called nuisance (secondary uncertain) parameters. Our results indicate that accounting for model uncertainty stemming from the presence of nuisance parameters is crucial. Namely our findings suggest that using nominal values for these parameters, as is often done in practice, without taking into account the resulting modeling error, can lead to overconfident and heavily biased results. We also show that the BAE approach can be used to account for the additional model uncertainty at no additional cost at the online stage.


Author(s):  
Janne Koponen ◽  
Tomi Huttunen ◽  
Tanja Tarvainen ◽  
Jari Kaipio

2010 ◽  
Vol 26 (12) ◽  
pp. 125003 ◽  
Author(s):  
J M J Huttunen ◽  
A Lehikoinen ◽  
J Hämäläinen ◽  
J P Kaipio

2012 ◽  
Vol 17 (9) ◽  
pp. 0960121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juha Heiskala ◽  
Ville Kolehmainen ◽  
Tanja Tarvainen ◽  
Jari. P. Kaipio ◽  
Simon R. Arridge

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olalekan Babaniyi ◽  
Ruanui Nicholson ◽  
Umberto Villa ◽  
Noémi Petra

Abstract. We consider the problem of inferring the basal sliding coefficient field for an uncertain Stokes ice sheet forward model from surface velocity measurements. The uncertainty in the forward model stems from unknown (or uncertain) auxiliary parameters (e.g., rheology parameters). This inverse problem is posed within the Bayesian framework, which provides a systematic means of quantifying uncertainty in the solution. To account for the associated model uncertainty (error), we employ the Bayesian Approximation Error (BAE) approach to approximately premarginalize simultaneously over both the noise in measurements and uncertainty in the forward model. We also carry out approximative posterior uncertainty quantification based on a linearization of the parameter-to-observable map centered at the maximum a posteriori (MAP) basal sliding coefficient estimate, i.e., by taking the Laplace approximation. The MAP estimate is found by minimizing the negative log posterior using an inexact Newton conjugate gradient method. The gradient and Hessian actions to vectors are efficiently computed using adjoints. Sampling from the approximate covariance is made tractable by invoking a low-rank approximation of the data misfit component of the Hessian. We study the performance of the BAE approach in the context of three numerical examples in two and three dimensions. For each example the basal sliding coefficient field is the parameter of primary interest, which we seek to infer, and the rheology parameters (e.g., the flow rate factor, or the Glen's flow law exponent coefficient field) represent so called nuisance (secondary uncertain) parameters. Our results indicate that accounting for model uncertainty stemming from the presence of nuisance parameters is crucial. Namely our findings suggest that using nominal values for these parameters, as is often done in practice, without taking into account the resulting modeling error, can lead to overconfident and heavily biased results. We also show that the BAE approach can be used to account for the additional model uncertainty at no additional cost at the online stage.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document