Skip to content

Extended Parmest Capability for weighted SSE objective #3535

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 87 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

slilonfe5
Copy link
Contributor

@slilonfe5 slilonfe5 commented Mar 24, 2025

Fixes # .

Summary/Motivation:

Currently, the Parmest SSE objective does not support measurements in different units. This work adds new capabilities to Parmest, including weighted SSE to handle measurements in different units, and more robust covariance matrix calculation methods for more accurate uncertainty quantification. This work also enables the calculation of the covariance matrix using a user-supplied measurement error standard deviation.

Changes proposed in this PR:

  • Added a weighted SSE objective
  • Added two covariance matrix calculation methods for both the SSE and weighted SSE objectives
  • Enabled calculation of the covariance matrix using a user-supplied measurement error standard deviation
  • Added a separate function for the covariance matrix estimation

Legal Acknowledgement

By contributing to this software project, I have read the contribution guide and agree to the following terms and conditions for my contribution:

  1. I agree my contributions are submitted under the BSD license.
  2. I represent I am authorized to make the contributions and grant the license. If my employer has rights to intellectual property that includes these contributions, I represent that I have received permission to make contributions and grant the required license on behalf of that employer.

@slilonfe5
Copy link
Contributor Author

@adowling2 @djlaky

@adowling2
Copy link
Member

@slilonfe5 Here is some quick feedback

compute_jacobian function

  • Make this a private method by adding _ to the function name
  • Add as an argument to the function relative_perturbation
  • In the document string, explain this is using forward (?) finite difference
  • Add as an argument the solver object. You can make the default Ipopt.

Feedback on the compute_FIM method:

  • Add relative_tolerance and solver as arguments
  • Also add a check that error_list must be the same length as y_hat_list
  • Add a debugging step for the linear algebra error, compute the condition number of the Jacobian matrix and print it out
  • Why would you ever get a linear algebra error for just matrix multiplication? Is this check even needed?

@slilonfe5
Copy link
Contributor Author

slilonfe5 commented Apr 19, 2025

@adowling2 @djlaky I also updated the calculation for the normal SSE such that we can use the user-supplied measurement error if defined; otherwise, we calculate the measurement error as usual.

Copy link
Member

@adowling2 adowling2 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nice progress. I think it is time to start writing tests for the new capabilities.

@adowling2
Copy link
Member

@slilonfe5 Once you have the tests ready, tag us for feedback. Also, I think you can skip adding this to the depreciated class.

Copy link
Member

@adowling2 adowling2 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Here is more feedback as you work on getting this ready for the Pyomo team to review.

@slilonfe5
Copy link
Contributor Author

@adowling2 @djlaky I have created a separate method (cov_est) for computing the covariance matrix, supporting three calculation methods (jacobian, kaug, and reduced_hessian). I implemented these covariance calculation methods for both the SSE and SSE_weighted objectives. Lastly, as you suggested, I did not add the new capability to the deprecated interface.

I tested these with three examples (2 steady state and 1 dynamic), and all work well. I'm yet to write the test file for these.

Copy link
Member

@blnicho blnicho left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@slilonfe5 here are a few more review comments. I'm still going through parmest.py

@blnicho blnicho moved this to Todo in Pyomo 6.9.4 Release Aug 12, 2025
@blnicho blnicho moved this from Todo to Review In Progress in Pyomo 6.9.4 Release Aug 12, 2025
@slilonfe5
Copy link
Contributor Author

@blnicho @mrmundt @jsiirola @djlaky @adowling2 I have implemented Bethany's final review.

(0.1, "incorrect_obj"),
],
)
class TestRooneyBieglerWSSE(unittest.TestCase):
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Since this test class is parameterized to test both SSE and WSSE you might want to change the class name to be more generic.

Suggested change
class TestRooneyBieglerWSSE(unittest.TestCase):
class TestParmestCovEst(unittest.TestCase):

Comment on lines 1 to +2
Covariance Matrix Estimation
=================================
============================
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It doesn't look like the functions for the "SSE" or "WSSE" objective functions are defined anywhere in the documentation. Also, what are the "weights" in the "WSSE"? You should probably add the functions here and perhaps again in the overview.rst file here:

The following least squares objective can be used to estimate parameter
values, where data points are indexed by :math:`s=1,\ldots,S`
.. math::
\min_{{\theta}} Q({\theta};{\tilde{x}}, {\tilde{y}}) \equiv \sum_{s=1}^{S}q_{s}({\theta};{\tilde{x}}_{s}, {\tilde{y}}_{s}) \;\;
where
.. math::
q_{s}({\theta};{\tilde{x}}_{s}, {\tilde{y}}_{s}) = \sum_{i=1}^{m}w_{i}\left[{\tilde{y}}_{si} - g_{i}({\tilde{x}}_{s};{\theta})\right]^{2},

Comment on lines +290 to +352
def test_cov_scipy_least_squares_comparison(self):
"""
Estimates the unknown parameters and covariance matrix from the measurement
error standard deviation using Scipy least_squares function.
"""
if self.measurement_std is None or self.objective_function == "incorrect_obj":
self.skipTest(
"This test only applies to 'SSE' and 'SSE_weighted' "
"objectives with user-supplied measurement error"
)

def model(theta, t):
"""
Model to be fitted y = model(theta, t)
Arguments:
theta: vector of fitted parameters
t: independent variable [hours]

Returns:
y: model predictions [need to check paper for units]
"""
asymptote = theta[0]
rate_constant = theta[1]

return asymptote * (1 - np.exp(-rate_constant * t))

def residual(theta, t, y):
"""
Calculate residuals
Arguments:
theta: vector of fitted parameters
t: independent variable [hours]
y: dependent variable [?]
"""
return y - model(theta, t)

# define data
t = self.data["hour"].to_numpy()
y = self.data["y"].to_numpy()

# define initial guess
theta_guess = np.array([15, 0.5])

## solve with optimize.least_squares
sol = scipy.optimize.least_squares(
residual, theta_guess, method="trf", args=(t, y), verbose=2
)
theta_hat = sol.x

self.assertAlmostEqual(
theta_hat[0], 19.1426, places=2
) # 19.1426 from the paper
self.assertAlmostEqual(theta_hat[1], 0.5311, places=2) # 0.5311 from the paper

# calculate the variance of the measurement error
sigre = self.measurement_std**2

cov = sigre * np.linalg.inv(np.matmul(sol.jac.T, sol.jac))

self.assertAlmostEqual(cov[0, 0], 0.009588, places=4)
self.assertAlmostEqual(cov[0, 1], -0.000665, places=4)
self.assertAlmostEqual(cov[1, 0], -0.000665, places=4)
self.assertAlmostEqual(cov[1, 1], 0.000063, places=4)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this test actually testing anything in parmest? I think it's an interesting example as an alternate calculation approach but it doesn't look like it's using parmest or Pyomo so I'm not sure it's appropriate to include here.

Comment on lines +398 to +399
# check if the model has all the required suffixes
_check_model_labels_helper(model, logging_level)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is there any way to reach the _compute_jacobian function without previously calling either SSE or SSE_weighted? I'm wondering if this call to _check_model_labels_helper is really needed or if we can assume that the model labels have already been checked.

Comment on lines +407 to +414
try:
solver = pyo.SolverFactory(solver)
solver.solve(model, tee=tee)
except Exception as e:
raise RuntimeError(
f"Model from experiment did not solve appropriately. Make sure the "
f"model is well-posed. The original error was {e}."
)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You usually want to avoid catching a generic Exception and check for the specific things you're worried about. In this case I'm guessing you're trying to catch the error that is thrown when you try to load an unconverged/failed Ipopt solution into the model. Here is an example of how you can check the solver termination condition and avoid the error:

from pyomo.opt import TerminationCondition

...

solver = pyo.SolverFactory(solver_name)
results = solver.solve(model, tee=tee, load_solutions=False)
if results.solver.termination_condition == TerminationCondition.optimal:
    model.solutions.load_from(results)
else:
    print ("Solution is not optimal")
    # now do something about it? raise an exception? ...

"with the `calc_cov` and `cov_n` arguments. This usage will be "
"removed in a future release. Please update to the new parmest "
"interface using `cov_est()` function for covariance calculation.",
version="6.9.3.dev0",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
version="6.9.3.dev0",
version="6.9.4.dev0",

"You're using a deprecated call to the `theta_est()` function "
"with the `calc_cov` and `cov_n` arguments. This usage will be "
"removed in a future release. Please update to the new parmest "
"interface using `cov_est()` function for covariance calculation.",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
"interface using `cov_est()` function for covariance calculation.",
"interface using the `cov_est()` function for covariance calculation.",

for key in self.solver_options:
solver.options[key] = self.solver_options[key]

solve_result = solver.solve(self.ef_instance, tee=self.tee)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should this call to solve be guarded in case of solver failure?

Comment on lines +1229 to +1237
Argument:
method: string ``method`` object specified by the user,
e.g., 'finite_difference'
solver: string ``solver`` object specified by the user, e.g., 'ipopt'
step: float used for relative perturbation of the parameters,
e.g., step=0.02 is a 2% perturbation

Returns:
cov: pd.DataFrame, covariance matrix of the estimated parameters
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Same comment about using the numpydoc format for docstrings

Comment on lines +1275 to +1281
try:
pyo.SolverFactory(solver).solve(model, tee=self.tee)
except Exception as e:
raise RuntimeError(
f"Model from experiment did not solve appropriately. Make sure the "
f"model is well-posed. The original error was {e}."
)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Same comment about catching a generic Exception

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
Status: Ready for final review
Status: Review In Progress
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants