Abstract

In recent years, new, intelligent and efficient sampling techniques for Monte Carlo simulation have been developed. However, when such new techniques are introduced, they are compared to one or two existing techniques, and their performance is evaluated over two or three problems. A literature survey shows that benchmark studies, comparing the performance of several techniques over several problems, are rarely found. This article presents a benchmark study, comparing Simple or Crude Monte Carlo with four modern sampling techniques: Importance Sampling Monte Carlo, Asymptotic Sampling, Enhanced Sampling and Subset Simulation; which are studied over six problems. Moreover, these techniques are combined with three schemes for generating the underlying samples: Simple Sampling, Latin Hypercube Sampling and Antithetic Variates Sampling. Hence, a total of fifteen sampling strategy combinations are explored herein. Due to space constrains, results are presented for only three of the six problems studied; conclusions, however, cover all problems studied. Results show that Importance Sampling using design points is extremely efficient for evaluating small failure probabilities; however, finding the design point can be an issue for some problems. Subset Simulation presented very good performance for all problems studied herein. Although similar, Enhanced Sampling performed better than Asymptotic Sampling for the problems considered: this is explained by the fact that in Enhanced Sampling the same set of samples is used for all support points; hence a larger number of support points can be employed without increasing the computational cost. Finally, the performance of all the above techniques was improved when combined with Latin Hypercube Sampling, in comparison to Simple or Antithetic Variates sampling.

Highlights

  • Since the early beginnings in the sixties and seventies, structural reliability analysis has reached a mature stage encompassing solid theoretical developments and increasing practical applications

  • The reference probability of failure is evaluated by Crude and by Importance Sampling Monte Carlo simulation, using Simple Sampling, Latin Hypercube Sampling and Antithetic Variates Sampling. 1×105 samples are employed for each solution

  • The original solution via Crude Monte Carlo took approximately 11 hours to compute a probability of failure with coefficient of variation of 0.27 and relative deviations of: 28.68% (Simple Sampling), 1.1% (Latin Hypercube Sampling) and 37.87% (Antithetic Variates Sampling)

Read more

Summary

INTRODUCTION

Since the early beginnings in the sixties and seventies, structural reliability analysis has reached a mature stage encompassing solid theoretical developments and increasing practical applications. Several intelligent sampling techniques for Monte Carlo simulation have been proposed in recent years (Au and Beck, 2001; Au, 2005; Au et al, 2007; Bucher, 2009; Sichani et al, 2011a; Sichani et al, 2011b; Sichani et al, 2014; Naess et al, 2009; Naess et al, 2012) When such techniques are introduced, they are generally compared with one or two existing techniques, and their performance is evaluated over two or three problems. This article presents a benchmark study, comparing Simple or Crude Monte Carlo with four modern sampling techniques: Importance Sampling Monte Carlo, Asymptotic Sampling, Enhanced Sampling and Subset Simulation over six problems These techniques are combined with three schemes for generating the underlying samples: Simple Sampling, Latin Hypercube Sampling and Antithetic Variates Sampling.

FORMULATION
Crude Monte Carlo Simulation
BASIC SAMPLING TECHNIQUES
Simple Sampling
Antithetic Variate Sampling
Latin Hypercube Sampling
Importance Sampling Monte Carlo
Enhanced Sampling
Subset Simulation
COMPARATIVE PERFORMANCE OF SIMULATION STRATEGIES
Example 1: non-linear limit state function
Example 2
Example 3: non-linear steel frame tower
Loading
Processing Time
CONCLUDING REMARKS
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call