Inscrição na biblioteca: Guest
International Journal for Uncertainty Quantification

Publicou 6 edições por ano

ISSN Imprimir: 2152-5080

ISSN On-line: 2152-5099

The Impact Factor measures the average number of citations received in a particular year by papers published in the journal during the two preceding years. 2017 Journal Citation Reports (Clarivate Analytics, 2018) IF: 1.7 To calculate the five year Impact Factor, citations are counted in 2017 to the previous five years and divided by the source items published in the previous five years. 2017 Journal Citation Reports (Clarivate Analytics, 2018) 5-Year IF: 1.9 The Immediacy Index is the average number of times an article is cited in the year it is published. The journal Immediacy Index indicates how quickly articles in a journal are cited. Immediacy Index: 0.5 The Eigenfactor score, developed by Jevin West and Carl Bergstrom at the University of Washington, is a rating of the total importance of a scientific journal. Journals are rated according to the number of incoming citations, with citations from highly ranked journals weighted to make a larger contribution to the eigenfactor than those from poorly ranked journals. Eigenfactor: 0.0007 The Journal Citation Indicator (JCI) is a single measurement of the field-normalized citation impact of journals in the Web of Science Core Collection across disciplines. The key words here are that the metric is normalized and cross-disciplinary. JCI: 0.5 SJR: 0.584 SNIP: 0.676 CiteScore™:: 3 H-Index: 25

Indexed in

AN ENHANCED FRAMEWORK FOR MORRIS BY COMBINING WITH A SEQUENTIAL SAMPLING STRATEGY

Volume 13, Edição 2, 2023, pp. 81-96
DOI: 10.1615/Int.J.UncertaintyQuantification.2022044335
Get accessGet access

RESUMO

The Morris method is an effective sample-based sensitivity analysis technique that has been applied in various disciplines. To ensure a more proper coverage of the input space and better performance, an enhanced framework for Morris is proposed by considering the combination of a sequential sampling strategy and the traditional Morris method. The paper introduces utilizing progressive Latin hypercube sampling to generate starting points while progressively preserving Latin hypercube property. Then the calculations for Elementary Effects, which occupies the major computational cost of Morris, become sequential. An adaptive stop criterion is also constructed to end the algorithm when the convergence condition is satisfied. Therefore, the proposed procedure makes the cost of Morris more manageable and minimizes the computational burden by conducting only model runs that are necessary to achieve reliable results. Two numerical examples and two real-world cases are given to illustrate the effectiveness and robustness of the framework.

Referências
  1. Cheng, K., Lu, Z., Ling, C., and Zhou, S., Surrogate-Assisted Global Sensitivity Analysis: An Overview, Struct. Multidisc. Opt, 61(3):1187-1213,2020.

  2. Francos, A., Elorza, F.J., Bouraoui, F., Bidoglio, G., and Galbiati, L., Sensitivity Analysis of Distributed Environmental Simulation Models: Understanding the Model Behaviour in Hydrological Studies at the Catchment Scale, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf, 79(2):205-218, 2003.

  3. Hsieh, N.H., Reisfeld, B., Bois, F.Y., and Chiu, W.A., Applying a Global Sensitivity Analysis Workflow to Improve the Computational Efficiencies in Physiologically-Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling, Front. Pharmacol, 9:588,2018.

  4. Mathieu, A., Vidal, T., Jullien, A., Wu, Q., Chambon, C., Bayol, B., and Cournede, P.H., A New Methodology Based on Sensitivity Analysis to Simplify the Recalibration of Functional-Structural Plant Models in New Conditions, Ann. Bot., 122(3):397-408, 2018.

  5. Morris, M.D., Factorial Sampling Plans for Preliminary Computational Experiments, Technometrics, 33(2):161-174, 1991.

  6. Campolongo, F., Cariboni, J., and Saltelli, A., An Effective Screening Design for Sensitivity Analysis of Large Models, Env. Model. Software, 22(10):1509-1518, 2007.

  7. Xiao, S., Lu, Z., and Xu, L., A New Effective Screening Design for Structural Sensitivity Analysis of Failure Probability with the Epistemic Uncertainty, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., 156:1-14, 2016.

  8. Xu, C. and Gertner, G., Understanding and Comparisons of Different Sampling Approaches for the Fourier Amplitudes Sensitivity Test (FAST), Comput. Stat. Data Anal, 55(1):184-198,2011.

  9. Sobol, I.M., Sensitivity Analysis for Non-Linear Mathematical Models, Math. Model. Comput. Exp., 1:407-414, 1993.

  10. Saltelli, A., Sensitivity Analysis for Importance Assessment, Risk Anal., 22(3):579-590,2002.

  11. Janon, A., Klein, T., Lagnoux, A., Nodet, M., and Prieur, C., Asymptotic Normality and Efficiency of Two Sobol Index Estimators, ESAIM: Probab. Stat, 18:342-364, 2014.

  12. Wei, P., Lu, Z., and Song, J., Variable Importance Analysis: A Comprehensive Review, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf, 142:399-432, 2015.

  13. Nicoulaud-Gouin, V., Mourlon, C., Tanaka, T., Le Dizes-Maurel, S., Garcia-Sanchez, L., Attard, J., Zorko, B., Mora, J., and Simon-Cornu, M., Sensitivity Analysis in a Radiological Impact Assessment of a Nuclear Power Plant Discharge. A Comparison of the Morris, Spearman and Sobol Approaches, J. Env. Radioact., 242:106770, 2022.

  14. Borgonovo, E., A New Uncertainty Importance Measure, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf, 92(6):111-184, 2001.

  15. Pianosi, F. and Wagener, T., A Simple and Efficient Method for Global Sensitivity Analysis Based on Cumulative Distribution Functions, Env. Model. Software, 67:1-11,2015.

  16. Liu, H., Chen, W., and Sudjianto, A., Relative Entropy Based Method for Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis in Engineering Design, J. Mech. Des., 128(2):326-336, 2006.

  17. Iooss, B. and Lemaitre, P., A Review on Global Sensitivity Analysis Methods, Uncertainty Management in Simulation-Optimization of Complex Systems, Berlin: Springer, pp. 101-122,2015.

  18. Razavi, S. and Gupta, H.V., A New Framework for Comprehensive, Robust, and Efficient Global Sensitivity Analysis: 1. Theory, Water Resour. Res., 52(1):423-439, 2016.

  19. Khan, S., Kaklis, P., Serani, A., and Diez, M., Geometric Moment-Dependent Global Sensitivity Analysis without Simulation Data: Application to Ship Hull Form Optimisation, Comput.-AidedDes., 151:103339,2022.

  20. Constantine, P.G. and Diaz, P., Global Sensitivity Metrics from Active Subspaces, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., 162:1-13, 2011.

  21. Wang, C., Peng, M., and Xia, G., Sensitivity Analysis Based on Morris Method of Passive System Performance under Ocean Conditions, Ann. Nucl. Energy, 137:101061, 2020.

  22. Cheng, Q., Feng, Q., Liu, Z., Gu, P., and Zhang, G., Sensitivity Analysis of Machining Accuracy of Multi-Axis Machine Tool Based on POE Screw Theory and Morris Method, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 84(9):2301-2318, 2016.

  23. King, D.M. and Perera, B., Morris Method of Sensitivity Analysis Applied to Assess the Importance of Input Variables on Urban Water Supply Yield-A Case Study, J. Hydrol., 477:11-32, 2013.

  24. Paleari, L., Movedi, E., Zoli, M., Burato, A., Cecconi, I., Errahouly, J., Pecollo, E., Sorvillo, C., and Confalonieri, R., Sensitivity Analysis Using Morris: Just Screening or an Effective Ranking Method?, Ecol. Model, 455:109648, 2021.

  25. Ruano, M., Ribes, J., Seco, A., and Ferrer, J., An Improved Sampling Strategy Based on Trajectory Design for Application of the Morris Method to Systems with Many Input Factors, Env. Model. Software, 37:103-109, 2012.

  26. McKay, M.D., Beckman, R.J., and Conover, W. J., A Comparison of Three Methods for Selecting Values of Input Variables in the Analysis of Output from a Computer Code, Technometrics, 42(1):55-61, 2000.

  27. McKay, J., Sensitivity and Uncertainty Analysis Using a Statistical Sample of Input Values, in Uncertainty Analysis, Y. Ronen, Ed., Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, pp. 145-186, 1988.

  28. van Griensven, A., Meixner, T., Grunwald, S., Bishop, T., Diluzio, M., and Srinivasan, R., A Global Sensitivity Analysis Tool for the Parameters of Multi-Variable Catchment Models, J. Hydrol, 324(1-4):10-23, 2006.

  29. Yuan, P., Cheng, J., Liu, Z., Liu, D., and Tan, J., Enhanced Morris for the Extraction of Significant Parameters in High-Dimensional Design Optimization, J. Mech. Sci. Technol., 30(11):5051-5062, 2016.

  30. Sheikholeslami, R. and Razavi, S., Progressive Latin Hypercube Sampling: An Efficient Approach for Robust Sampling-Based Analysis of Environmental Models, Env. Model. Software, 93:109-126, 2011.

  31. Qian, P.Z., Sliced Latin Hypercube Designs, J.Am. Stat. Assoc, 107(491):393-399, 2012.

  32. Marelli, S. and Sudret, B., UQLab: A Framework for Uncertainty Quantification in Matlab, in Vulnerability, Uncertainty, and Risk: Quantification, Mitigation, and Management, Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers, pp. 2554-2563, 2014.

  33. Lindstrom, G., Johansson, B., Persson, M., Gardelin, M., andBergstrom, S., Development and Test of the Distributed HBV-96 Hydrological Model, J. Hydrol, 201(1-4):212-288, 1991.

  34. Razavi, S., Sheikholeslami, R., Gupta, H.V., and Haghnegahdar, A., VARS-TOOL: A Toolbox for Comprehensive, Efficient, and Robust Sensitivity and Uncertainty Analysis, Env. Model. Software, 112:95-101, 2019.

Portal Digital Begell Biblioteca digital da Begell eBooks Diários Referências e Anais Coleções de pesquisa Políticas de preços e assinaturas Begell House Contato Language English 中文 Русский Português German French Spain