用于全局灵敏度分析的全阶估计量的综合比较

IF 1.5 4区 工程技术 Q2 ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
A. Puy, W. Becker, S. L. Piano, Andrea Saltelli
{"title":"用于全局灵敏度分析的全阶估计量的综合比较","authors":"A. Puy, W. Becker, S. L. Piano, Andrea Saltelli","doi":"10.1615/Int.J.UncertaintyQuantification.2021038133","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Sensitivity analysis helps identify which model inputs convey the most uncertainty to the model output. One of the most authoritative measures in global sensitivity analysis is the Sobol' total-order index, which can be computed with several different estimators. Although previous comparisons exist, it is hard to know which estimator performs best since the results are contingent on the benchmark setting defined by the analyst (the sampling method, the distribution of the model inputs, the number of model runs, the test function or model and its dimensionality, the weight of higher order effects or the performance measure selected). Here we compare several total-order estimators in an eight-dimension hypercube where these benchmark parameters are treated as random parameters. This arrangement significantly relaxes the dependency of the results on the benchmark design. We observe that the most accurate estimators are Razavi and Gupta's, Jansen's or Janon/Monod's for factor prioritization, and Jansen's, Janon/Monod's or Azzini and Rosati's for approaching the\"true\"total-order indices. The rest lag considerably behind. Our work helps analysts navigate the myriad of total-order formulae by reducing the uncertainty in the selection of the most appropriate estimator.","PeriodicalId":48814,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Uncertainty Quantification","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"19","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comprehensive comparison of total-order estimators for global sensitivity analysis\",\"authors\":\"A. Puy, W. Becker, S. L. Piano, Andrea Saltelli\",\"doi\":\"10.1615/Int.J.UncertaintyQuantification.2021038133\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Sensitivity analysis helps identify which model inputs convey the most uncertainty to the model output. One of the most authoritative measures in global sensitivity analysis is the Sobol' total-order index, which can be computed with several different estimators. Although previous comparisons exist, it is hard to know which estimator performs best since the results are contingent on the benchmark setting defined by the analyst (the sampling method, the distribution of the model inputs, the number of model runs, the test function or model and its dimensionality, the weight of higher order effects or the performance measure selected). Here we compare several total-order estimators in an eight-dimension hypercube where these benchmark parameters are treated as random parameters. This arrangement significantly relaxes the dependency of the results on the benchmark design. We observe that the most accurate estimators are Razavi and Gupta's, Jansen's or Janon/Monod's for factor prioritization, and Jansen's, Janon/Monod's or Azzini and Rosati's for approaching the\\\"true\\\"total-order indices. The rest lag considerably behind. Our work helps analysts navigate the myriad of total-order formulae by reducing the uncertainty in the selection of the most appropriate estimator.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48814,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal for Uncertainty Quantification\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"19\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal for Uncertainty Quantification\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1615/Int.J.UncertaintyQuantification.2021038133\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal for Uncertainty Quantification","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1615/Int.J.UncertaintyQuantification.2021038133","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

摘要

敏感性分析有助于确定哪些模型输入向模型输出传递了最大的不确定性。全局灵敏度分析中最权威的度量之一是Sobol的全阶指数,它可以用几种不同的估计量来计算。尽管存在先前的比较,但很难知道哪个估计器表现最好,因为结果取决于分析师定义的基准设置(采样方法、模型输入的分布、模型运行的次数、测试函数或模型及其维度、高阶效应的权重或所选的性能度量)。在这里,我们比较了八维超立方体中的几个全阶估计量,其中这些基准参数被视为随机参数。这种安排显著地放松了结果对基准设计的依赖性。我们观察到,最准确的估计量是Razavi和Gupta的、Jansen的或Janon/Monod的因子优先级,以及Jansen的、Janon/Manod的或Azzini和Rosati的接近“真实”总序指数的估计量。其余的大大落后了。我们的工作通过减少选择最合适估计量的不确定性,帮助分析师浏览无数的总阶公式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A comprehensive comparison of total-order estimators for global sensitivity analysis
Sensitivity analysis helps identify which model inputs convey the most uncertainty to the model output. One of the most authoritative measures in global sensitivity analysis is the Sobol' total-order index, which can be computed with several different estimators. Although previous comparisons exist, it is hard to know which estimator performs best since the results are contingent on the benchmark setting defined by the analyst (the sampling method, the distribution of the model inputs, the number of model runs, the test function or model and its dimensionality, the weight of higher order effects or the performance measure selected). Here we compare several total-order estimators in an eight-dimension hypercube where these benchmark parameters are treated as random parameters. This arrangement significantly relaxes the dependency of the results on the benchmark design. We observe that the most accurate estimators are Razavi and Gupta's, Jansen's or Janon/Monod's for factor prioritization, and Jansen's, Janon/Monod's or Azzini and Rosati's for approaching the"true"total-order indices. The rest lag considerably behind. Our work helps analysts navigate the myriad of total-order formulae by reducing the uncertainty in the selection of the most appropriate estimator.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal for Uncertainty Quantification
International Journal for Uncertainty Quantification ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
5.90%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The International Journal for Uncertainty Quantification disseminates information of permanent interest in the areas of analysis, modeling, design and control of complex systems in the presence of uncertainty. The journal seeks to emphasize methods that cross stochastic analysis, statistical modeling and scientific computing. Systems of interest are governed by differential equations possibly with multiscale features. Topics of particular interest include representation of uncertainty, propagation of uncertainty across scales, resolving the curse of dimensionality, long-time integration for stochastic PDEs, data-driven approaches for constructing stochastic models, validation, verification and uncertainty quantification for predictive computational science, and visualization of uncertainty in high-dimensional spaces. Bayesian computation and machine learning techniques are also of interest for example in the context of stochastic multiscale systems, for model selection/classification, and decision making. Reports addressing the dynamic coupling of modern experiments and modeling approaches towards predictive science are particularly encouraged. Applications of uncertainty quantification in all areas of physical and biological sciences are appropriate.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信