Inverse Transformation from Response Surface

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on the inverse transformation from a response surface in a parametric study involving N tables with identical structures but varying dependent parameters, denoted as ##I_m##, based on independent parameters ##b_k##. The primary method discussed is the quadratic response surface method, specifically using a second-order interpolation to model the dependency of ##I_1## on ##b_1## and ##b_2##. The user seeks to recreate the original data tables through optimization techniques, acknowledging the complexity of non-linear response surfaces and the necessity for linear optimization at specific points.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of response surface methodology (RSM)
  • Familiarity with optimization techniques, particularly linear optimization
  • Knowledge of parametric studies in experimental design
  • Basic concepts of interpolation methods in data analysis
NEXT STEPS
  • Study quadratic response surface modeling techniques
  • Learn about linear optimization methods and their applications in data interpolation
  • Explore non-linear optimization strategies for complex response surfaces
  • Investigate the principles of Design of Experiments (DoE) for effective parametric studies
USEFUL FOR

Engineers, data analysts, and researchers involved in experimental design and optimization, particularly those working with response surface methodologies and data interpolation techniques.

Omega0
Messages
215
Reaction score
52
TL;DR
If I get global parameters from data which can be approximated with a response surface, how do I interpolate data from it.
Let us say we have data which is for simplicity in N tables. All the tables have the same number of rows and columns. The columns ##A_i## have for all tables the same meaning (say measured quantaties like pressure, temperature) where the first 3 columns is the position in space. Again for simplicity, let the quantities for all tables be identified in the same space coordinates. This means we have N tables with the same structure but the values themselves are different. The main reson for the difference is that I change the physical conditions: We vary parameters ##b_k## (like angles etc.) called independent parameters. This could be a setup for a Design of Experiment study. So, we have a parametric study.
Now we calculate somehow integral quantities ##I_m## for all the tables. Those quantities are called our dependent parameters. We now analyze if we can see a dependency between ##I_m## and ##b_k##. Here we will have a bunch of methods ##M_j##. Let us say ##M_1## is a quadratic response surface for the dependent parameter ##I_1## and the both independent parameters ##b_1## and ##b_2##. This means basically we believe that a second order interpolation is representing the dependancy good enough. Having done this we get a smooth function ##I_1(b_1,b_2)## where ##b_1## and ##b_2## are real numbers. With other words: We get results for arbitrary independent values (for better imagination, those are typically values between two discrete really existing independent parameters).

Okay, now me question: For such an arbitrary pair of independent values I would like to calculate or recreate the table from which the dependent values came. The table would represent an interpolation of the really excisting values in the N tables.

I know that this is a standard thing in engineering but I am not sure how it works. I would guess in the dark that I take the unique N vectors of my tables and run an optimizer to find the distribution of weight for the N vectors to get the ##I_1##. Next step would be to use the weighting for the tables to get a new table, representing the interpolation. This would be pretty simple if we use linear optimization but we have to take into account that my response surface is non-linear. In arbitrary cases the function could be of higher order or some way more fancy approximation.
How do I get my table? Thanks.

EDIT: I think that it doesn't matter how complex the function is because I am just interested in one point after each other or with other words: I solve a linear optimization for any point I am interested in, right? It seems like calculus in arbitrary dimensions.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I suggest you make another attempt to state you question. Your description of the data isn't clear and you haven't stated a well defined mathematical question. Perhaps a specific example would be the simplest way to explain things.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
8K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K