12 resultados para Whether costs may be awarded on indemnity basis

em Universidad Politécnica de Madrid


Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Knowledge resource reuse has become a popular approach within the ontology engineering field, mainly because it can speed up the ontology development process, saving time and money and promoting the application of good practices. The NeOn Methodology provides guidelines for reuse. These guidelines include the selection of the most appropriate knowledge resources for reuse in ontology development. This is a complex decision-making problem where different conflicting objectives, like the reuse cost, understandability, integration workload and reliability, have to be taken into account simultaneously. GMAA is a PC-based decision support system based on an additive multi-attribute utility model that is intended to allay the operational difficulties involved in the Decision Analysis methodology. The paper illustrates how it can be applied to select multimedia ontologies for reuse to develop a new ontology in the multimedia domain. It also demonstrates that the sensitivity analyses provided by GMAA are useful tools for making a final recommendation.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Feed-in-tariff (FIT) schemes have been widely employed to promote renewable energy deployment. While FITs may be perceived by consumers as an extra cost, renewable energies cause a noticeable price reduction in wholesale electricity markets. We analyse both effects for the case of the Spanish electricity market during 2010. In particular, we examine the level of FITs that makes savings and extra costs to be similar on an hourly basis. Results are obtained for a wide range of renewable generation scenarios. It is found that FITs with null extra costs for consumers are in the range of 50–80 €/MWh. Some of the side-effects of a high penetration of renewable energy in the market are analysed in detail and discussed.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

A total of 106 potential duplicate cases involved 277 accessions were detected on the basis of passport data in the durum wheat collection maintained in the CRF-INIA. Similarity between accessions was measured by agro-morphological traits. The 90% of the agro-morphological duplication were verified with gliadin proteins, allowing identification of similar material with greater refinement than agro-morphological data. However, the results indicated not to decide for rationalisation only on the basis of molecular data.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

A total of 106 potential duplicate cases involved 277 accessions were detected on the basis of passport data in the durum wheat collection maintained in the CRF-INIA. Similarity between accessions was measured by agro-morphological traits. The 90% of the agro-morphological duplication were verified with gliadin proteins, allowing identification of similar material with greater refinement than agro-morphological data. However, the results indicated not to decide for rationalisation only on the basis of molecular data

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The interest of this study is based on the observation that some manufacturing processes of various vehicles wings, such as unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), or blades, such as wind turbine blades, or other devices that use aerodynamic profiles, produce imperfections in the leading edge or open trailing edge with bigger thickness than original airfoil, because, for example, they are manufactured in two parts, top surface and bottom surface and subsequently joined. In this last step might appear a sliding between the top surface and the bottom surface having a small step on the leading edge or a small thickness gain can occur on the trailing edge. Normally these imperfections are corrected through a refill and/or sanding processes using many hours of manual labor. Therefore the initial objective of this research is to determine the level of influence in the aerodynamic characteristics at low Reynolds numbers (Lissaman, 1981, Carmichael, 1981, Nagamatsu and Cuche, 1981, Schmitz, 1957, Cebeci, 1989, Mueller and Batill, 1982) of these imperfections in the manufacture, and determine whether there may be a value for which it would not be necessary to correct them

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

OntoTag - A Linguistic and Ontological Annotation Model Suitable for the Semantic Web 1. INTRODUCTION. LINGUISTIC TOOLS AND ANNOTATIONS: THEIR LIGHTS AND SHADOWS Computational Linguistics is already a consolidated research area. It builds upon the results of other two major ones, namely Linguistics and Computer Science and Engineering, and it aims at developing computational models of human language (or natural language, as it is termed in this area). Possibly, its most well-known applications are the different tools developed so far for processing human language, such as machine translation systems and speech recognizers or dictation programs. These tools for processing human language are commonly referred to as linguistic tools. Apart from the examples mentioned above, there are also other types of linguistic tools that perhaps are not so well-known, but on which most of the other applications of Computational Linguistics are built. These other types of linguistic tools comprise POS taggers, natural language parsers and semantic taggers, amongst others. All of them can be termed linguistic annotation tools. Linguistic annotation tools are important assets. In fact, POS and semantic taggers (and, to a lesser extent, also natural language parsers) have become critical resources for the computer applications that process natural language. Hence, any computer application that has to analyse a text automatically and ‘intelligently’ will include at least a module for POS tagging. The more an application needs to ‘understand’ the meaning of the text it processes, the more linguistic tools and/or modules it will incorporate and integrate. However, linguistic annotation tools have still some limitations, which can be summarised as follows: 1. Normally, they perform annotations only at a certain linguistic level (that is, Morphology, Syntax, Semantics, etc.). 2. They usually introduce a certain rate of errors and ambiguities when tagging. This error rate ranges from 10 percent up to 50 percent of the units annotated for unrestricted, general texts. 3. Their annotations are most frequently formulated in terms of an annotation schema designed and implemented ad hoc. A priori, it seems that the interoperation and the integration of several linguistic tools into an appropriate software architecture could most likely solve the limitations stated in (1). Besides, integrating several linguistic annotation tools and making them interoperate could also minimise the limitation stated in (2). Nevertheless, in the latter case, all these tools should produce annotations for a common level, which would have to be combined in order to correct their corresponding errors and inaccuracies. Yet, the limitation stated in (3) prevents both types of integration and interoperation from being easily achieved. In addition, most high-level annotation tools rely on other lower-level annotation tools and their outputs to generate their own ones. For example, sense-tagging tools (operating at the semantic level) often use POS taggers (operating at a lower level, i.e., the morphosyntactic) to identify the grammatical category of the word or lexical unit they are annotating. Accordingly, if a faulty or inaccurate low-level annotation tool is to be used by other higher-level one in its process, the errors and inaccuracies of the former should be minimised in advance. Otherwise, these errors and inaccuracies would be transferred to (and even magnified in) the annotations of the high-level annotation tool. Therefore, it would be quite useful to find a way to (i) correct or, at least, reduce the errors and the inaccuracies of lower-level linguistic tools; (ii) unify the annotation schemas of different linguistic annotation tools or, more generally speaking, make these tools (as well as their annotations) interoperate. Clearly, solving (i) and (ii) should ease the automatic annotation of web pages by means of linguistic tools, and their transformation into Semantic Web pages (Berners-Lee, Hendler and Lassila, 2001). Yet, as stated above, (ii) is a type of interoperability problem. There again, ontologies (Gruber, 1993; Borst, 1997) have been successfully applied thus far to solve several interoperability problems. Hence, ontologies should help solve also the problems and limitations of linguistic annotation tools aforementioned. Thus, to summarise, the main aim of the present work was to combine somehow these separated approaches, mechanisms and tools for annotation from Linguistics and Ontological Engineering (and the Semantic Web) in a sort of hybrid (linguistic and ontological) annotation model, suitable for both areas. This hybrid (semantic) annotation model should (a) benefit from the advances, models, techniques, mechanisms and tools of these two areas; (b) minimise (and even solve, when possible) some of the problems found in each of them; and (c) be suitable for the Semantic Web. The concrete goals that helped attain this aim are presented in the following section. 2. GOALS OF THE PRESENT WORK As mentioned above, the main goal of this work was to specify a hybrid (that is, linguistically-motivated and ontology-based) model of annotation suitable for the Semantic Web (i.e. it had to produce a semantic annotation of web page contents). This entailed that the tags included in the annotations of the model had to (1) represent linguistic concepts (or linguistic categories, as they are termed in ISO/DCR (2008)), in order for this model to be linguistically-motivated; (2) be ontological terms (i.e., use an ontological vocabulary), in order for the model to be ontology-based; and (3) be structured (linked) as a collection of ontology-based triples, as in the usual Semantic Web languages (namely RDF(S) and OWL), in order for the model to be considered suitable for the Semantic Web. Besides, to be useful for the Semantic Web, this model should provide a way to automate the annotation of web pages. As for the present work, this requirement involved reusing the linguistic annotation tools purchased by the OEG research group (http://www.oeg-upm.net), but solving beforehand (or, at least, minimising) some of their limitations. Therefore, this model had to minimise these limitations by means of the integration of several linguistic annotation tools into a common architecture. Since this integration required the interoperation of tools and their annotations, ontologies were proposed as the main technological component to make them effectively interoperate. From the very beginning, it seemed that the formalisation of the elements and the knowledge underlying linguistic annotations within an appropriate set of ontologies would be a great step forward towards the formulation of such a model (henceforth referred to as OntoTag). Obviously, first, to combine the results of the linguistic annotation tools that operated at the same level, their annotation schemas had to be unified (or, preferably, standardised) in advance. This entailed the unification (id. standardisation) of their tags (both their representation and their meaning), and their format or syntax. Second, to merge the results of the linguistic annotation tools operating at different levels, their respective annotation schemas had to be (a) made interoperable and (b) integrated. And third, in order for the resulting annotations to suit the Semantic Web, they had to be specified by means of an ontology-based vocabulary, and structured by means of ontology-based triples, as hinted above. Therefore, a new annotation scheme had to be devised, based both on ontologies and on this type of triples, which allowed for the combination and the integration of the annotations of any set of linguistic annotation tools. This annotation scheme was considered a fundamental part of the model proposed here, and its development was, accordingly, another major objective of the present work. All these goals, aims and objectives could be re-stated more clearly as follows: Goal 1: Development of a set of ontologies for the formalisation of the linguistic knowledge relating linguistic annotation. Sub-goal 1.1: Ontological formalisation of the EAGLES (1996a; 1996b) de facto standards for morphosyntactic and syntactic annotation, in a way that helps respect the triple structure recommended for annotations in these works (which is isomorphic to the triple structures used in the context of the Semantic Web). Sub-goal 1.2: Incorporation into this preliminary ontological formalisation of other existing standards and standard proposals relating the levels mentioned above, such as those currently under development within ISO/TC 37 (the ISO Technical Committee dealing with Terminology, which deals also with linguistic resources and annotations). Sub-goal 1.3: Generalisation and extension of the recommendations in EAGLES (1996a; 1996b) and ISO/TC 37 to the semantic level, for which no ISO/TC 37 standards have been developed yet. Sub-goal 1.4: Ontological formalisation of the generalisations and/or extensions obtained in the previous sub-goal as generalisations and/or extensions of the corresponding ontology (or ontologies). Sub-goal 1.5: Ontological formalisation of the knowledge required to link, combine and unite the knowledge represented in the previously developed ontology (or ontologies). Goal 2: Development of OntoTag’s annotation scheme, a standard-based abstract scheme for the hybrid (linguistically-motivated and ontological-based) annotation of texts. Sub-goal 2.1: Development of the standard-based morphosyntactic annotation level of OntoTag’s scheme. This level should include, and possibly extend, the recommendations of EAGLES (1996a) and also the recommendations included in the ISO/MAF (2008) standard draft. Sub-goal 2.2: Development of the standard-based syntactic annotation level of the hybrid abstract scheme. This level should include, and possibly extend, the recommendations of EAGLES (1996b) and the ISO/SynAF (2010) standard draft. Sub-goal 2.3: Development of the standard-based semantic annotation level of OntoTag’s (abstract) scheme. Sub-goal 2.4: Development of the mechanisms for a convenient integration of the three annotation levels already mentioned. These mechanisms should take into account the recommendations included in the ISO/LAF (2009) standard draft. Goal 3: Design of OntoTag’s (abstract) annotation architecture, an abstract architecture for the hybrid (semantic) annotation of texts (i) that facilitates the integration and interoperation of different linguistic annotation tools, and (ii) whose results comply with OntoTag’s annotation scheme. Sub-goal 3.1: Specification of the decanting processes that allow for the classification and separation, according to their corresponding levels, of the results of the linguistic tools annotating at several different levels. Sub-goal 3.2: Specification of the standardisation processes that allow (a) complying with the standardisation requirements of OntoTag’s annotation scheme, as well as (b) combining the results of those linguistic tools that share some level of annotation. Sub-goal 3.3: Specification of the merging processes that allow for the combination of the output annotations and the interoperation of those linguistic tools that share some level of annotation. Sub-goal 3.4: Specification of the merge processes that allow for the integration of the results and the interoperation of those tools performing their annotations at different levels. Goal 4: Generation of OntoTagger’s schema, a concrete instance of OntoTag’s abstract scheme for a concrete set of linguistic annotations. These linguistic annotations result from the tools and the resources available in the research group, namely • Bitext’s DataLexica (http://www.bitext.com/EN/datalexica.asp), • LACELL’s (POS) tagger (http://www.um.es/grupos/grupo-lacell/quees.php), • Connexor’s FDG (http://www.connexor.eu/technology/machinese/glossary/fdg/), and • EuroWordNet (Vossen et al., 1998). This schema should help evaluate OntoTag’s underlying hypotheses, stated below. Consequently, it should implement, at least, those levels of the abstract scheme dealing with the annotations of the set of tools considered in this implementation. This includes the morphosyntactic, the syntactic and the semantic levels. Goal 5: Implementation of OntoTagger’s configuration, a concrete instance of OntoTag’s abstract architecture for this set of linguistic tools and annotations. This configuration (1) had to use the schema generated in the previous goal; and (2) should help support or refute the hypotheses of this work as well (see the next section). Sub-goal 5.1: Implementation of the decanting processes that facilitate the classification and separation of the results of those linguistic resources that provide annotations at several different levels (on the one hand, LACELL’s tagger operates at the morphosyntactic level and, minimally, also at the semantic level; on the other hand, FDG operates at the morphosyntactic and the syntactic levels and, minimally, at the semantic level as well). Sub-goal 5.2: Implementation of the standardisation processes that allow (i) specifying the results of those linguistic tools that share some level of annotation according to the requirements of OntoTagger’s schema, as well as (ii) combining these shared level results. In particular, all the tools selected perform morphosyntactic annotations and they had to be conveniently combined by means of these processes. Sub-goal 5.3: Implementation of the merging processes that allow for the combination (and possibly the improvement) of the annotations and the interoperation of the tools that share some level of annotation (in particular, those relating the morphosyntactic level, as in the previous sub-goal). Sub-goal 5.4: Implementation of the merging processes that allow for the integration of the different standardised and combined annotations aforementioned, relating all the levels considered. Sub-goal 5.5: Improvement of the semantic level of this configuration by adding a named entity recognition, (sub-)classification and annotation subsystem, which also uses the named entities annotated to populate a domain ontology, in order to provide a concrete application of the present work in the two areas involved (the Semantic Web and Corpus Linguistics). 3. MAIN RESULTS: ASSESSMENT OF ONTOTAG’S UNDERLYING HYPOTHESES The model developed in the present thesis tries to shed some light on (i) whether linguistic annotation tools can effectively interoperate; (ii) whether their results can be combined and integrated; and, if they can, (iii) how they can, respectively, interoperate and be combined and integrated. Accordingly, several hypotheses had to be supported (or rejected) by the development of the OntoTag model and OntoTagger (its implementation). The hypotheses underlying OntoTag are surveyed below. Only one of the hypotheses (H.6) was rejected; the other five could be confirmed. H.1 The annotations of different levels (or layers) can be integrated into a sort of overall, comprehensive, multilayer and multilevel annotation, so that their elements can complement and refer to each other. • CONFIRMED by the development of: o OntoTag’s annotation scheme, o OntoTag’s annotation architecture, o OntoTagger’s (XML, RDF, OWL) annotation schemas, o OntoTagger’s configuration. H.2 Tool-dependent annotations can be mapped onto a sort of tool-independent annotations and, thus, can be standardised. • CONFIRMED by means of the standardisation phase incorporated into OntoTag and OntoTagger for the annotations yielded by the tools. H.3 Standardisation should ease: H.3.1: The interoperation of linguistic tools. H.3.2: The comparison, combination (at the same level and layer) and integration (at different levels or layers) of annotations. • H.3 was CONFIRMED by means of the development of OntoTagger’s ontology-based configuration: o Interoperation, comparison, combination and integration of the annotations of three different linguistic tools (Connexor’s FDG, Bitext’s DataLexica and LACELL’s tagger); o Integration of EuroWordNet-based, domain-ontology-based and named entity annotations at the semantic level. o Integration of morphosyntactic, syntactic and semantic annotations. H.4 Ontologies and Semantic Web technologies (can) play a crucial role in the standardisation of linguistic annotations, by providing consensual vocabularies and standardised formats for annotation (e.g., RDF triples). • CONFIRMED by means of the development of OntoTagger’s RDF-triple-based annotation schemas. H.5 The rate of errors introduced by a linguistic tool at a given level, when annotating, can be reduced automatically by contrasting and combining its results with the ones coming from other tools, operating at the same level. However, these other tools might be built following a different technological (stochastic vs. rule-based, for example) or theoretical (dependency vs. HPS-grammar-based, for instance) approach. • CONFIRMED by the results yielded by the evaluation of OntoTagger. H.6 Each linguistic level can be managed and annotated independently. • REJECTED: OntoTagger’s experiments and the dependencies observed among the morphosyntactic annotations, and between them and the syntactic annotations. In fact, Hypothesis H.6 was already rejected when OntoTag’s ontologies were developed. We observed then that several linguistic units stand on an interface between levels, belonging thereby to both of them (such as morphosyntactic units, which belong to both the morphological level and the syntactic level). Therefore, the annotations of these levels overlap and cannot be handled independently when merged into a unique multileveled annotation. 4. OTHER MAIN RESULTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS First, interoperability is a hot topic for both the linguistic annotation community and the whole Computer Science field. The specification (and implementation) of OntoTag’s architecture for the combination and integration of linguistic (annotation) tools and annotations by means of ontologies shows a way to make these different linguistic annotation tools and annotations interoperate in practice. Second, as mentioned above, the elements involved in linguistic annotation were formalised in a set (or network) of ontologies (OntoTag’s linguistic ontologies). • On the one hand, OntoTag’s network of ontologies consists of − The Linguistic Unit Ontology (LUO), which includes a mostly hierarchical formalisation of the different types of linguistic elements (i.e., units) identifiable in a written text; − The Linguistic Attribute Ontology (LAO), which includes also a mostly hierarchical formalisation of the different types of features that characterise the linguistic units included in the LUO; − The Linguistic Value Ontology (LVO), which includes the corresponding formalisation of the different values that the attributes in the LAO can take; − The OIO (OntoTag’s Integration Ontology), which  Includes the knowledge required to link, combine and unite the knowledge represented in the LUO, the LAO and the LVO;  Can be viewed as a knowledge representation ontology that describes the most elementary vocabulary used in the area of annotation. • On the other hand, OntoTag’s ontologies incorporate the knowledge included in the different standards and recommendations for linguistic annotation released so far, such as those developed within the EAGLES and the SIMPLE European projects or by the ISO/TC 37 committee: − As far as morphosyntactic annotations are concerned, OntoTag’s ontologies formalise the terms in the EAGLES (1996a) recommendations and their corresponding terms within the ISO Morphosyntactic Annotation Framework (ISO/MAF, 2008) standard; − As for syntactic annotations, OntoTag’s ontologies incorporate the terms in the EAGLES (1996b) recommendations and their corresponding terms within the ISO Syntactic Annotation Framework (ISO/SynAF, 2010) standard draft; − Regarding semantic annotations, OntoTag’s ontologies generalise and extend the recommendations in EAGLES (1996a; 1996b) and, since no stable standards or standard drafts have been released for semantic annotation by ISO/TC 37 yet, they incorporate the terms in SIMPLE (2000) instead; − The terms coming from all these recommendations and standards were supplemented by those within the ISO Data Category Registry (ISO/DCR, 2008) and also of the ISO Linguistic Annotation Framework (ISO/LAF, 2009) standard draft when developing OntoTag’s ontologies. Third, we showed that the combination of the results of tools annotating at the same level can yield better results (both in precision and in recall) than each tool separately. In particular, 1. OntoTagger clearly outperformed two of the tools integrated into its configuration, namely DataLexica and FDG in all the combination sub-phases in which they overlapped (i.e. POS tagging, lemma annotation and morphological feature annotation). As far as the remaining tool is concerned, i.e. LACELL’s tagger, it was also outperformed by OntoTagger in POS tagging and lemma annotation, and it did not behave better than OntoTagger in the morphological feature annotation layer. 2. As an immediate result, this implies that a) This type of combination architecture configurations can be applied in order to improve significantly the accuracy of linguistic annotations; and b) Concerning the morphosyntactic level, this could be regarded as a way of constructing more robust and more accurate POS tagging systems. Fourth, Semantic Web annotations are usually performed by humans or else by machine learning systems. Both of them leave much to be desired: the former, with respect to their annotation rate; the latter, with respect to their (average) precision and recall. In this work, we showed how linguistic tools can be wrapped in order to annotate automatically Semantic Web pages using ontologies. This entails their fast, robust and accurate semantic annotation. As a way of example, as mentioned in Sub-goal 5.5, we developed a particular OntoTagger module for the recognition, classification and labelling of named entities, according to the MUC and ACE tagsets (Chinchor, 1997; Doddington et al., 2004). These tagsets were further specified by means of a domain ontology, namely the Cinema Named Entities Ontology (CNEO). This module was applied to the automatic annotation of ten different web pages containing cinema reviews (that is, around 5000 words). In addition, the named entities annotated with this module were also labelled as instances (or individuals) of the classes included in the CNEO and, then, were used to populate this domain ontology. • The statistical results obtained from the evaluation of this particular module of OntoTagger can be summarised as follows. On the one hand, as far as recall (R) is concerned, (R.1) the lowest value was 76,40% (for file 7); (R.2) the highest value was 97, 50% (for file 3); and (R.3) the average value was 88,73%. On the other hand, as far as the precision rate (P) is concerned, (P.1) its minimum was 93,75% (for file 4); (R.2) its maximum was 100% (for files 1, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10); and (R.3) its average value was 98,99%. • These results, which apply to the tasks of named entity annotation and ontology population, are extraordinary good for both of them. They can be explained on the basis of the high accuracy of the annotations provided by OntoTagger at the lower levels (mainly at the morphosyntactic level). However, they should be conveniently qualified, since they might be too domain- and/or language-dependent. It should be further experimented how our approach works in a different domain or a different language, such as French, English, or German. • In any case, the results of this application of Human Language Technologies to Ontology Population (and, accordingly, to Ontological Engineering) seem very promising and encouraging in order for these two areas to collaborate and complement each other in the area of semantic annotation. Fifth, as shown in the State of the Art of this work, there are different approaches and models for the semantic annotation of texts, but all of them focus on a particular view of the semantic level. Clearly, all these approaches and models should be integrated in order to bear a coherent and joint semantic annotation level. OntoTag shows how (i) these semantic annotation layers could be integrated together; and (ii) they could be integrated with the annotations associated to other annotation levels. Sixth, we identified some recommendations, best practices and lessons learned for annotation standardisation, interoperation and merge. They show how standardisation (via ontologies, in this case) enables the combination, integration and interoperation of different linguistic tools and their annotations into a multilayered (or multileveled) linguistic annotation, which is one of the hot topics in the area of Linguistic Annotation. And last but not least, OntoTag’s annotation scheme and OntoTagger’s annotation schemas show a way to formalise and annotate coherently and uniformly the different units and features associated to the different levels and layers of linguistic annotation. This is a great scientific step ahead towards the global standardisation of this area, which is the aim of ISO/TC 37 (in particular, Subcommittee 4, dealing with the standardisation of linguistic annotations and resources).

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Knowing the size of the terms to which program variables are bound at run-time in logic programs is required in a class of applications related to program optimization such as, for example, granularity analysis and selection among different algorithms or control rules whose performance may be dependent on such size. Such size is difficult to even approximate at compile time and is thus generally computed at run-time by using (possibly predefined) predicates which traverse the terms involved. We propose a technique based on program transformation which has the potential of performing this computation much more efficiently. The technique is based on finding program procedures which are called before those in which knowledge regarding term sizes is needed and which traverse the terms whose size is to be determined, and transforming such procedures so that they compute term sizes "on the fly". We present a systematic way of determining whether a given program can be transformed in order to compute a given term size at a given program point without additional term traversal. Also, if several such transformations are possible our approach allows finding minimal transformations under certain criteria. We also discuss the advantages and applications of our technique and present some performance results.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The need for the simulation of spectrum compatible earthquake time histories has existed since earthquake engineering for complicated structures began. More than the safety of the main structure, the analysis of the equipment (piping, racks, etc.) can only be assessed on the basis of the time history of the floor in which they are contained. This paper presents several methods for calculating simulated spectrum compatible earthquakes as well as a comparison between them. As a result of this comparison, the use of the phase content in real earthquakes as proposed by Ohsaki appears as an effective alternative to the classical methods. With this method, it is possible to establish an approach without the arbitrary modulation commonly used in other methods. Different procedures are described as is the influence of the different parameters which appear in the analysis. Several numerical examples are also presented, and the effectiveness of Ohsaki's method is confirmed.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

A unified solution framework is presented for one-, two- or three-dimensional complex non-symmetric eigenvalue problems, respectively governing linear modal instability of incompressible fluid flows in rectangular domains having two, one or no homogeneous spatial directions. The solution algorithm is based on subspace iteration in which the spatial discretization matrix is formed, stored and inverted serially. Results delivered by spectral collocation based on the Chebyshev-Gauss-Lobatto (CGL) points and a suite of high-order finite-difference methods comprising the previously employed for this type of work Dispersion-Relation-Preserving (DRP) and Padé finite-difference schemes, as well as the Summationby- parts (SBP) and the new high-order finite-difference scheme of order q (FD-q) have been compared from the point of view of accuracy and efficiency in standard validation cases of temporal local and BiGlobal linear instability. The FD-q method has been found to significantly outperform all other finite difference schemes in solving classic linear local, BiGlobal, and TriGlobal eigenvalue problems, as regards both memory and CPU time requirements. Results shown in the present study disprove the paradigm that spectral methods are superior to finite difference methods in terms of computational cost, at equal accuracy, FD-q spatial discretization delivering a speedup of ð (10 4). Consequently, accurate solutions of the three-dimensional (TriGlobal) eigenvalue problems may be solved on typical desktop computers with modest computational effort.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Los pseudo-despolarizadores espaciales, entre los que se encuentran los denominados prismas despolarizadores, son dispositivos ópticos capaces de modificar el estado de polarización en cada punto del plano transversal de los haces de luz, obteniendo un continuo de estados de polarización y por tanto un grado de polarización estándar próximo a cero. En la literatura, en reiteradas ocasiones se utilizan estos prismas asumiendo la aproximación de que en su cara oblicua no existe doble reflexión. En el presente trabajo se investigan en detalle las características de polarización locales y globales de haces monocromáticos planos a la salida de un prisma despolarizador teniendo en cuenta la doble reflexión y se comparan los resultados con el caso de despreciar esta doble reflexión. Como consecuencia se obtienen las condiciones bajo las cuales el efecto de la doble reflexión puede ser despreciable. ABSTRACT: Spatial pseudo-depolarizers are optical devices that modify the polarization state along the transverse plane of a light beam in such a way that a continuum of polarization states are obtained. Consequently, a standard degree of polarization near to zero is reached when average over the whole beam section is taken. Depolarizing prism is an example of spatial pseudo-depolarizer. Double reflection effects are usually not considered in literature for such devices. In the present work, the polarization properties at the exit of a depolarizing prism are studied taking into account the effect of double reflection and the results are compared to those obtained when double reflection is neglected. Conditions under which the double reflection effect may be negligible on depolarizing action of this class of prisms are obtained.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Biomass has always been associated with the development of the population in the Canary Islands as the first source of elemental energy that was in the archipelago and the main cause of deforestation of forests, which over the years has been replaced by forest fossil fuels. The Canary Islands store a large amount of energy in the form of biomass. This may be important on a small scale for the design of small power plants with similar fuels from agricultural activities, and these plants could supply rural areas that could have self-sufficiency energy. The problem with the Canary Islands for a boost in this achievement is to ensure the supply to the consumer centers or power plants for greater efficiency that must operate continuously, allowing them to have a resource with regularity, quality and at an acceptable cost. In the Canary Islands converge also a unique topography with a very rugged terrain that makes it greater difficult to use and significantly more expensive. In this work all these aspects are studied, giving conclusions, action paths and theoretical potentials.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

El análisis determinista de seguridad (DSA) es el procedimiento que sirve para diseñar sistemas, estructuras y componentes relacionados con la seguridad en las plantas nucleares. El DSA se basa en simulaciones computacionales de una serie de hipotéticos accidentes representativos de la instalación, llamados escenarios base de diseño (DBS). Los organismos reguladores señalan una serie de magnitudes de seguridad que deben calcularse en las simulaciones, y establecen unos criterios reguladores de aceptación (CRA), que son restricciones que deben cumplir los valores de esas magnitudes. Las metodologías para realizar los DSA pueden ser de 2 tipos: conservadoras o realistas. Las metodologías conservadoras utilizan modelos predictivos e hipótesis marcadamente pesimistas, y, por ello, relativamente simples. No necesitan incluir un análisis de incertidumbre de sus resultados. Las metodologías realistas se basan en hipótesis y modelos predictivos realistas, generalmente mecanicistas, y se suplementan con un análisis de incertidumbre de sus principales resultados. Se les denomina también metodologías BEPU (“Best Estimate Plus Uncertainty”). En ellas, la incertidumbre se representa, básicamente, de manera probabilista. Para metodologías conservadores, los CRA son, simplemente, restricciones sobre valores calculados de las magnitudes de seguridad, que deben quedar confinados en una “región de aceptación” de su recorrido. Para metodologías BEPU, el CRA no puede ser tan sencillo, porque las magnitudes de seguridad son ahora variables inciertas. En la tesis se desarrolla la manera de introducción de la incertidumbre en los CRA. Básicamente, se mantiene el confinamiento a la misma región de aceptación, establecida por el regulador. Pero no se exige el cumplimiento estricto sino un alto nivel de certidumbre. En el formalismo adoptado, se entiende por ello un “alto nivel de probabilidad”, y ésta corresponde a la incertidumbre de cálculo de las magnitudes de seguridad. Tal incertidumbre puede considerarse como originada en los inputs al modelo de cálculo, y propagada a través de dicho modelo. Los inputs inciertos incluyen las condiciones iniciales y de frontera al cálculo, y los parámetros empíricos de modelo, que se utilizan para incorporar la incertidumbre debida a la imperfección del modelo. Se exige, por tanto, el cumplimiento del CRA con una probabilidad no menor a un valor P0 cercano a 1 y definido por el regulador (nivel de probabilidad o cobertura). Sin embargo, la de cálculo de la magnitud no es la única incertidumbre existente. Aunque un modelo (sus ecuaciones básicas) se conozca a la perfección, la aplicación input-output que produce se conoce de manera imperfecta (salvo que el modelo sea muy simple). La incertidumbre debida la ignorancia sobre la acción del modelo se denomina epistémica; también se puede decir que es incertidumbre respecto a la propagación. La consecuencia es que la probabilidad de cumplimiento del CRA no se puede conocer a la perfección; es una magnitud incierta. Y así se justifica otro término usado aquí para esta incertidumbre epistémica: metaincertidumbre. Los CRA deben incorporar los dos tipos de incertidumbre: la de cálculo de la magnitud de seguridad (aquí llamada aleatoria) y la de cálculo de la probabilidad (llamada epistémica o metaincertidumbre). Ambas incertidumbres pueden introducirse de dos maneras: separadas o combinadas. En ambos casos, el CRA se convierte en un criterio probabilista. Si se separan incertidumbres, se utiliza una probabilidad de segundo orden; si se combinan, se utiliza una probabilidad única. Si se emplea la probabilidad de segundo orden, es necesario que el regulador imponga un segundo nivel de cumplimiento, referido a la incertidumbre epistémica. Se denomina nivel regulador de confianza, y debe ser un número cercano a 1. Al par formado por los dos niveles reguladores (de probabilidad y de confianza) se le llama nivel regulador de tolerancia. En la Tesis se razona que la mejor manera de construir el CRA BEPU es separando las incertidumbres, por dos motivos. Primero, los expertos defienden el tratamiento por separado de incertidumbre aleatoria y epistémica. Segundo, el CRA separado es (salvo en casos excepcionales) más conservador que el CRA combinado. El CRA BEPU no es otra cosa que una hipótesis sobre una distribución de probabilidad, y su comprobación se realiza de forma estadística. En la tesis, los métodos estadísticos para comprobar el CRA BEPU en 3 categorías, según estén basados en construcción de regiones de tolerancia, en estimaciones de cuantiles o en estimaciones de probabilidades (ya sea de cumplimiento, ya sea de excedencia de límites reguladores). Según denominación propuesta recientemente, las dos primeras categorías corresponden a los métodos Q, y la tercera, a los métodos P. El propósito de la clasificación no es hacer un inventario de los distintos métodos en cada categoría, que son muy numerosos y variados, sino de relacionar las distintas categorías y citar los métodos más utilizados y los mejor considerados desde el punto de vista regulador. Se hace mención especial del método más utilizado hasta el momento: el método no paramétrico de Wilks, junto con su extensión, hecha por Wald, al caso multidimensional. Se decribe su método P homólogo, el intervalo de Clopper-Pearson, típicamente ignorado en el ámbito BEPU. En este contexto, se menciona el problema del coste computacional del análisis de incertidumbre. Los métodos de Wilks, Wald y Clopper-Pearson requieren que la muestra aleatortia utilizada tenga un tamaño mínimo, tanto mayor cuanto mayor el nivel de tolerancia exigido. El tamaño de muestra es un indicador del coste computacional, porque cada elemento muestral es un valor de la magnitud de seguridad, que requiere un cálculo con modelos predictivos. Se hace especial énfasis en el coste computacional cuando la magnitud de seguridad es multidimensional; es decir, cuando el CRA es un criterio múltiple. Se demuestra que, cuando las distintas componentes de la magnitud se obtienen de un mismo cálculo, el carácter multidimensional no introduce ningún coste computacional adicional. Se prueba así la falsedad de una creencia habitual en el ámbito BEPU: que el problema multidimensional sólo es atacable desde la extensión de Wald, que tiene un coste de computación creciente con la dimensión del problema. En el caso (que se da a veces) en que cada componente de la magnitud se calcula independientemente de los demás, la influencia de la dimensión en el coste no se puede evitar. Las primeras metodologías BEPU hacían la propagación de incertidumbres a través de un modelo sustitutivo (metamodelo o emulador) del modelo predictivo o código. El objetivo del metamodelo no es su capacidad predictiva, muy inferior a la del modelo original, sino reemplazar a éste exclusivamente en la propagación de incertidumbres. Para ello, el metamodelo se debe construir con los parámetros de input que más contribuyan a la incertidumbre del resultado, y eso requiere un análisis de importancia o de sensibilidad previo. Por su simplicidad, el modelo sustitutivo apenas supone coste computacional, y puede estudiarse exhaustivamente, por ejemplo mediante muestras aleatorias. En consecuencia, la incertidumbre epistémica o metaincertidumbre desaparece, y el criterio BEPU para metamodelos se convierte en una probabilidad simple. En un resumen rápido, el regulador aceptará con más facilidad los métodos estadísticos que menos hipótesis necesiten; los exactos más que los aproximados; los no paramétricos más que los paramétricos, y los frecuentistas más que los bayesianos. El criterio BEPU se basa en una probabilidad de segundo orden. La probabilidad de que las magnitudes de seguridad estén en la región de aceptación no sólo puede asimilarse a una probabilidad de éxito o un grado de cumplimiento del CRA. También tiene una interpretación métrica: representa una distancia (dentro del recorrido de las magnitudes) desde la magnitud calculada hasta los límites reguladores de aceptación. Esta interpretación da pie a una definición que propone esta tesis: la de margen de seguridad probabilista. Dada una magnitud de seguridad escalar con un límite superior de aceptación, se define el margen de seguridad (MS) entre dos valores A y B de la misma como la probabilidad de que A sea menor que B, obtenida a partir de las incertidumbres de A y B. La definición probabilista de MS tiene varias ventajas: es adimensional, puede combinarse de acuerdo con las leyes de la probabilidad y es fácilmente generalizable a varias dimensiones. Además, no cumple la propiedad simétrica. El término margen de seguridad puede aplicarse a distintas situaciones: distancia de una magnitud calculada a un límite regulador (margen de licencia); distancia del valor real de la magnitud a su valor calculado (margen analítico); distancia desde un límite regulador hasta el valor umbral de daño a una barrera (margen de barrera). Esta idea de representar distancias (en el recorrido de magnitudes de seguridad) mediante probabilidades puede aplicarse al estudio del conservadurismo. El margen analítico puede interpretarse como el grado de conservadurismo (GC) de la metodología de cálculo. Utilizando la probabilidad, se puede cuantificar el conservadurismo de límites de tolerancia de una magnitud, y se pueden establecer indicadores de conservadurismo que sirvan para comparar diferentes métodos de construcción de límites y regiones de tolerancia. Un tópico que nunca se abordado de manera rigurosa es el de la validación de metodologías BEPU. Como cualquier otro instrumento de cálculo, una metodología, antes de poder aplicarse a análisis de licencia, tiene que validarse, mediante la comparación entre sus predicciones y valores reales de las magnitudes de seguridad. Tal comparación sólo puede hacerse en escenarios de accidente para los que existan valores medidos de las magnitudes de seguridad, y eso ocurre, básicamente en instalaciones experimentales. El objetivo último del establecimiento de los CRA consiste en verificar que se cumplen para los valores reales de las magnitudes de seguridad, y no sólo para sus valores calculados. En la tesis se demuestra que una condición suficiente para este objetivo último es la conjunción del cumplimiento de 2 criterios: el CRA BEPU de licencia y un criterio análogo, pero aplicado a validación. Y el criterio de validación debe demostrarse en escenarios experimentales y extrapolarse a plantas nucleares. El criterio de licencia exige un valor mínimo (P0) del margen probabilista de licencia; el criterio de validación exige un valor mínimo del margen analítico (el GC). Esos niveles mínimos son básicamente complementarios; cuanto mayor uno, menor el otro. La práctica reguladora actual impone un valor alto al margen de licencia, y eso supone que el GC exigido es pequeño. Adoptar valores menores para P0 supone menor exigencia sobre el cumplimiento del CRA, y, en cambio, más exigencia sobre el GC de la metodología. Y es importante destacar que cuanto mayor sea el valor mínimo del margen (de licencia o analítico) mayor es el coste computacional para demostrarlo. Así que los esfuerzos computacionales también son complementarios: si uno de los niveles es alto (lo que aumenta la exigencia en el cumplimiento del criterio) aumenta el coste computacional. Si se adopta un valor medio de P0, el GC exigido también es medio, con lo que la metodología no tiene que ser muy conservadora, y el coste computacional total (licencia más validación) puede optimizarse. ABSTRACT Deterministic Safety Analysis (DSA) is the procedure used in the design of safety-related systems, structures and components of nuclear power plants (NPPs). DSA is based on computational simulations of a set of hypothetical accidents of the plant, named Design Basis Scenarios (DBS). Nuclear regulatory authorities require the calculation of a set of safety magnitudes, and define the regulatory acceptance criteria (RAC) that must be fulfilled by them. Methodologies for performing DSA van be categorized as conservative or realistic. Conservative methodologies make use of pessimistic model and assumptions, and are relatively simple. They do not need an uncertainty analysis of their results. Realistic methodologies are based on realistic (usually mechanistic) predictive models and assumptions, and need to be supplemented with uncertainty analyses of their results. They are also termed BEPU (“Best Estimate Plus Uncertainty”) methodologies, and are typically based on a probabilistic representation of the uncertainty. For conservative methodologies, the RAC are simply the restriction of calculated values of safety magnitudes to “acceptance regions” defined on their range. For BEPU methodologies, the RAC cannot be so simple, because the safety magnitudes are now uncertain. In the present Thesis, the inclusion of uncertainty in RAC is studied. Basically, the restriction to the acceptance region must be fulfilled “with a high certainty level”. Specifically, a high probability of fulfillment is required. The calculation uncertainty of the magnitudes is considered as propagated from inputs through the predictive model. Uncertain inputs include model empirical parameters, which store the uncertainty due to the model imperfection. The fulfillment of the RAC is required with a probability not less than a value P0 close to 1 and defined by the regulator (probability or coverage level). Calculation uncertainty is not the only one involved. Even if a model (i.e. the basic equations) is perfectly known, the input-output mapping produced by the model is imperfectly known (unless the model is very simple). This ignorance is called epistemic uncertainty, and it is associated to the process of propagation). In fact, it is propagated to the probability of fulfilling the RAC. Another term used on the Thesis for this epistemic uncertainty is metauncertainty. The RAC must include the two types of uncertainty: one for the calculation of the magnitude (aleatory uncertainty); the other one, for the calculation of the probability (epistemic uncertainty). The two uncertainties can be taken into account in a separate fashion, or can be combined. In any case the RAC becomes a probabilistic criterion. If uncertainties are separated, a second-order probability is used; of both are combined, a single probability is used. On the first case, the regulator must define a level of fulfillment for the epistemic uncertainty, termed regulatory confidence level, as a value close to 1. The pair of regulatory levels (probability and confidence) is termed the regulatory tolerance level. The Thesis concludes that the adequate way of setting the BEPU RAC is by separating the uncertainties. There are two reasons to do so: experts recommend the separation of aleatory and epistemic uncertainty; and the separated RAC is in general more conservative than the joint RAC. The BEPU RAC is a hypothesis on a probability distribution, and must be statistically tested. The Thesis classifies the statistical methods to verify the RAC fulfillment in 3 categories: methods based on tolerance regions, in quantile estimators and on probability (of success or failure) estimators. The former two have been termed Q-methods, whereas those in the third category are termed P-methods. The purpose of our categorization is not to make an exhaustive survey of the very numerous existing methods. Rather, the goal is to relate the three categories and examine the most used methods from a regulatory standpoint. Special mention deserves the most used method, due to Wilks, and its extension to multidimensional variables (due to Wald). The counterpart P-method of Wilks’ is Clopper-Pearson interval, typically ignored in the BEPU realm. The problem of the computational cost of an uncertainty analysis is tackled. Wilks’, Wald’s and Clopper-Pearson methods require a minimum sample size, which is a growing function of the tolerance level. The sample size is an indicator of the computational cost, because each element of the sample must be calculated with the predictive models (codes). When the RAC is a multiple criteria, the safety magnitude becomes multidimensional. When all its components are output of the same calculation, the multidimensional character does not introduce additional computational cost. In this way, an extended idea in the BEPU realm, stating that the multi-D problem can only be tackled with the Wald extension, is proven to be false. When the components of the magnitude are independently calculated, the influence of the problem dimension on the cost cannot be avoided. The former BEPU methodologies performed the uncertainty propagation through a surrogate model of the code, also termed emulator or metamodel. The goal of a metamodel is not the predictive capability, clearly worse to the original code, but the capacity to propagate uncertainties with a lower computational cost. The emulator must contain the input parameters contributing the most to the output uncertainty, and this requires a previous importance analysis. The surrogate model is practically inexpensive to run, so that it can be exhaustively analyzed through Monte Carlo. Therefore, the epistemic uncertainty due to sampling will be reduced to almost zero, and the BEPU RAC for metamodels includes a simple probability. The regulatory authority will tend to accept the use of statistical methods which need a minimum of assumptions: exact, nonparametric and frequentist methods rather than approximate, parametric and bayesian methods, respectively. The BEPU RAC is based on a second-order probability. The probability of the safety magnitudes being inside the acceptance region is a success probability and can be interpreted as a fulfillment degree if the RAC. Furthermore, it has a metric interpretation, as a distance (in the range of magnitudes) from calculated values of the magnitudes to acceptance regulatory limits. A probabilistic definition of safety margin (SM) is proposed in the thesis. The same from a value A to other value B of a safety magnitude is defined as the probability that A is less severe than B, obtained from the uncertainties if A and B. The probabilistic definition of SM has several advantages: it is nondimensional, ranges in the interval (0,1) and can be easily generalized to multiple dimensions. Furthermore, probabilistic SM are combined according to the probability laws. And a basic property: probabilistic SM are not symmetric. There are several types of SM: distance from a calculated value to a regulatory limit (licensing margin); or from the real value to the calculated value of a magnitude (analytical margin); or from the regulatory limit to the damage threshold (barrier margin). These representations of distances (in the magnitudes’ range) as probabilities can be applied to the quantification of conservativeness. Analytical margins can be interpreted as the degree of conservativeness (DG) of the computational methodology. Conservativeness indicators are established in the Thesis, useful in the comparison of different methods of constructing tolerance limits and regions. There is a topic which has not been rigorously tackled to the date: the validation of BEPU methodologies. Before being applied in licensing, methodologies must be validated, on the basis of comparisons of their predictions ad real values of the safety magnitudes. Real data are obtained, basically, in experimental facilities. The ultimate goal of establishing RAC is to verify that real values (aside from calculated values) fulfill them. In the Thesis it is proved that a sufficient condition for this goal is the conjunction of 2 criteria: the BEPU RAC and an analogous criterion for validation. And this las criterion must be proved in experimental scenarios and extrapolated to NPPs. The licensing RAC requires a minimum value (P0) of the probabilistic licensing margin; the validation criterion requires a minimum value of the analytical margin (i.e., of the DG). These minimum values are basically complementary; the higher one of them, the lower the other one. The regulatory practice sets a high value on the licensing margin, so that the required DG is low. The possible adoption of lower values for P0 would imply weaker exigence on the RCA fulfillment and, on the other hand, higher exigence on the conservativeness of the methodology. It is important to highlight that a higher minimum value of the licensing or analytical margin requires a higher computational cost. Therefore, the computational efforts are also complementary. If medium levels are adopted, the required DG is also medium, and the methodology does not need to be very conservative. The total computational effort (licensing plus validation) could be optimized.