Benchmarking Active Subspace methods of global sensitivity analysis against variance-based Sobol' and Morris methods with established test functions

被引:4
作者
Sun, Xifu [1 ]
Croke, Barry [1 ,2 ]
Jakeman, Anthony [2 ]
Roberts, Stephen [1 ]
机构
[1] Australian Natl Univ, Math Sci Inst, Canberra, ACT, Australia
[2] Australian Natl Univ, Fenner Sch Environm & Soc, Inst Water Futures, Canberra, ACT, Australia
关键词
Global sensitivity analysis; Test function; Active subspace; Activity score; Variance-based Sobol' method; Morris method; ENVIRONMENTAL-MODELS; DIMENSION REDUCTION; SAMPLING METHODS; UNCERTAINTY; CONVERGENCE; FRAMEWORK; ROBUST; DESIGNS; PLANS;
D O I
10.1016/j.envsoft.2022.105310
中图分类号
TP39 [计算机的应用];
学科分类号
081203 ; 0835 ;
摘要
Active Subspaces is a recently developed concept that identifies essential directions of the response surface of a model, providing sensitivity metrics known as activity scores. We compare activity scoring with the Sobol' and the Morris global methods using a series of well-known benchmark test functions with exactly computable sensitivities. In the ranking context, we analyse the accuracy, efficiency, impact of sampling method, convergence rate, and confidence interval estimation through both bootstrapping and replication. Heat maps that show both numerical rankings and underlying sensitivities with increasing sample size are introduced as a key visualization tool for such analysis. Convergence is also assessed through four previous measures. Activity scores match the total-effect sensitivity index of Sobol' and the absolute mean of elementary effect of Morris in most test cases. Activity scoring can be more computationally efficient. Its potential can be enhanced by expanding methods for approximating the gradient of the model function.
引用
收藏
页数:18
相关论文
共 105 条
[1]  
Abdo M.G., 2016, PHYS REACTORS 2016 P, V1, P653
[2]   Sampling methods and sensitivity analysis for large parameter sets [J].
Andres, TH .
JOURNAL OF STATISTICAL COMPUTATION AND SIMULATION, 1997, 57 (1-4) :77-110
[3]  
Antonov I. A., 1979, USSR Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Physics, V19, P252, DOI DOI 10.1016/0041-5553(79)90085-5
[4]   Sensitivity measures, ANOVA-like techniques and the use of bootstrap [J].
Archer, GEB ;
Saltelli, A ;
Sobol, IM .
JOURNAL OF STATISTICAL COMPUTATION AND SIMULATION, 1997, 58 (02) :99-120
[5]   Convergence of sensitivity analysis methods for evaluating combined influences of model inputs [J].
Awad, Majdi ;
Kiesse, Tristan Senga ;
Assaghir, Zainab ;
Ventura, Anne .
RELIABILITY ENGINEERING & SYSTEM SAFETY, 2019, 189 :109-122
[6]   Uncertainty, sensitivity and improvements in soil moisture estimation with cosmic-ray neutron sensing [J].
Baroni, G. ;
Scheiffele, L. M. ;
Schroen, M. ;
Ingwersen, J. ;
Oswald, S. E. .
JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY, 2018, 564 :873-887
[7]   A General Probabilistic Framework for uncertainty and global sensitivity analysis of deterministic models: A hydrological case study [J].
Baroni, G. ;
Tarantola, S. .
ENVIRONMENTAL MODELLING & SOFTWARE, 2014, 51 :26-34
[8]   Identifying relevant hydrological and catchment properties in active subspaces: An inference study of a lumped karst aquifer model [J].
Bittner, Daniel ;
Parente, Mario Teixeira ;
Mattis, Steven ;
Wohlmuth, Barbara ;
Chiogna, Gabriele .
ADVANCES IN WATER RESOURCES, 2020, 135
[9]  
Bratley P., 1992, ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation, V2, P195, DOI 10.1145/146382.146385
[10]  
Bridges R.A., 2019, ARXIV190413386, P1204