
doi: 10.1137/030601466
Summary: Solving an inverse problem means determining the parameters of a model given a set of measurements. In solving many practical inverse problems, accounting for the uncertainty of the solution is very important in aiding decision-making. A standard approach to do this begins by choosing a model parametrization and then using a Bayesian approach to make inferences on the model parameters from measurement data. However, this quantified uncertainty is a function of the model parametrization and for many inverse problems; there are many model parametrizations that account for the data equally well. A well-known approach to accounting for model uncertainty is Bayesian model averaging, where many model parametrizations are considered. Significant computational costs are associated with this method because one must compute the posterior distribution for each model parametrization. We consider a family of model parametrizations given by decimated wavelet bases. By decimated wavelet basis we mean a subset of the model's coordinates in a wavelet basis. For linear inverse problems, we demonstrate new fast algorithms for updating the prior and posterior covariance matrices when wavelet model parameters are added or deleted from the decimated basis. We also introduce algorithms for updating the determinant and Cholesky decomposition of the model's covariance matrices. These algorithms deliver order of magnitude savings over computing these covariance matrices from scratch and make Bayesian model averaging a realistic approach for accounting for uncertainty in inverse problem solutions. In order to clarify the role of our model updates, we show that our wavelet model update algorithms update the model's posterior distribution after modifying the model's local spatial resolution, whereas Kalman filters provide a means of updating a model when assimilating new measurement data. These results show a major advantage to be gained by parametrizing models with wavelets and represent a significant step forward in addressing the challenging computational problem of dealing with large models that account for uncertainty.
covariance matrix, numerical examples, Inverse problems for integral equations, Bayesian approach, Computational problems in statistics, Analysis of variance and covariance (ANOVA), model averaging, Direct numerical methods for linear systems and matrix inversion, algorithms, determinant, wavelets, multiwavelets, Bayesian problems; characterization of Bayes procedures, Numerical methods for wavelets, inverse problem, Kalman filter, model update, uncertainty, Numerical methods for inverse problems for integral equations, Cholesky decomposition
covariance matrix, numerical examples, Inverse problems for integral equations, Bayesian approach, Computational problems in statistics, Analysis of variance and covariance (ANOVA), model averaging, Direct numerical methods for linear systems and matrix inversion, algorithms, determinant, wavelets, multiwavelets, Bayesian problems; characterization of Bayes procedures, Numerical methods for wavelets, inverse problem, Kalman filter, model update, uncertainty, Numerical methods for inverse problems for integral equations, Cholesky decomposition
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 3 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
