An exercise in model validation: Comparing univariate statistics and Monte Carlo-based multivariate statistics

The complexity of mathematical models used by practicing engineers is increasing due to the growing availability of sophisticated mathematical modeling tools and ever-improving computational power. For this reason, the need to define a well-structured process for validating these models against experimental results has become a pressing issue in the engineering community. This validation process is partially characterized by the uncertainties associated with the modeling effort as well as the experimental results. The net impact of the uncertainties on the validation effort is assessed through the “noise level of the validation procedure”, which can be defined as an estimate of the 95% confidence uncertainty bounds for the comparison error between actual experimental results and model-based predictions of the same quantities of interest. Although general descriptions associated with the construction of the noise level using multivariate statistics exists in the literature, a detailed procedure outlining how to account for the systematic and random uncertainties is not available. In this paper, the methodology used to derive the covariance matrix associated with the multivariate normal pdf based on random and systematic uncertainties is examined, and a procedure used to estimate this covariance matrix using Monte Carlo analysis is presented. The covariance matrices are then used to construct approximate 95% confidence constant probability contours associated with comparison error results for a practical example. In addition, the example is used to show the drawbacks of using a first-order sensitivity analysis when nonlinear local sensitivity coefficients exist. Finally, the example is used to show the connection between the noise level of the validation exercise calculated using multivariate and univariate statistics.