RECORD
Active learning for efficiently training emulators of computationally expensive mathematical models
Methodology · Submitted 18 Dec 2018
abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review
The authors' main claim The proposed algorithm attained satisfactory performance in all analyses, had smaller variability than the treed Gaussian Processes (it is deterministic), and, on average, had similar or better performance as the treed Gaussian Processes in 6 out of 7 benchmark functions and in the prostate cancer model.
The compiled record
The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.
Open the compiled record
The abstract, sentence by sentence
An emulator is a fast-to-evaluate statistical approximation of a detailed mathematical model (simulator). When used in lieu of simulators, emulators can expedite tasks that require many repeated evaluations, such as sensitivity analyses, policy optimization, model calibration, and value-of-information analyses. Emulators are developed using the output of simulators at specific input values (design points). Developing an emulator that closely approximates the simulator can require many design points, which becomes computationally expensive. We describe a self-terminating active learning algorithm to efficiently develop emulators tailored to a specific emulation task, and compare it with algorithms that optimize geometric criteria (random latin hypercube sampling and maximum projection designs) and other active learning algorithms (treed Gaussian Processes that optimize typical active learning criteria). We compared the algorithms' root mean square error (RMSE) and maximum absolute deviation from the simulator (MAX) for seven benchmark functions and in a prostate cancer screening model. In the empirical analyses, in simulators with greatly-varying smoothness over the input domain, active learning algorithms resulted in emulators with smaller RMSE and MAX for the same number of design points. In all other cases, all algorithms performed comparably. The proposed algorithm attained satisfactory performance in all analyses, had smaller variability than the treed Gaussian Processes (it is deterministic), and, on average, had similar or better performance as the treed Gaussian Processes in 6 out of 7 benchmark functions and in the prostate cancer model.
background contribution method result interpretation main claim
| # | sentence | role | the authors' own work | states the main conclusion | strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| s0 | An emulator is a fast-to-evaluate statistical approximation of a detailed mathematical model (simulator). | background 1.00 | 0.04 | 0.01 | asserted 1.00 |
| s1 | When used in lieu of simulators, emulators can expedite tasks that require many repeated evaluations, such as sensitivity analyses, policy optimization, model calibration, and value-of-information analyses. | background 1.00 | 0.05 | 0.03 | asserted 0.70 |
| s2 | Emulators are developed using the output of simulators at specific input values (design points). | background 0.98 | 0.06 | 0.02 | asserted 1.00 |
| s3 | Developing an emulator that closely approximates the simulator can require many design points, which becomes computationally expensive. | background 0.93 | 0.07 | 0.02 | asserted 0.65 |
| s4 | We describe a self-terminating active learning algorithm to efficiently develop emulators tailored to a specific emulation task, and compare it with algorithms that optimize geometric criteria (random latin hypercube sampling and maximum projection designs) and other active learning algorithms (treed Gaussian Processes that optimize typical active learning criteria). | contribution 0.89 | 0.92 | 0.08 | asserted 0.96 |
| s5 | We compared the algorithms' root mean square error (RMSE) and maximum absolute deviation from the simulator (MAX) for seven benchmark functions and in a prostate cancer screening model. | method 0.95 | 0.96 | 0.03 | asserted 0.98 |
| s6 | In the empirical analyses, in simulators with greatly-varying smoothness over the input domain, active learning algorithms resulted in emulators with smaller RMSE and MAX for the same number of design points. | result 1.00 | 0.95 | 0.33 | asserted 1.00 |
| s7 | In all other cases, all algorithms performed comparably. | result 1.00 | 0.91 | 0.13 | asserted 1.00 |
| s8 | The proposed algorithm attained satisfactory performance in all analyses, had smaller variability than the treed Gaussian Processes (it is deterministic), and, on average, had similar or better performance as the treed Gaussian Processes in 6 out of 7 benchmark functions and in the prostate cancer model. | result 0.96 | 0.96 | 0.52 | asserted 1.00 |
What was examined, and what was not
- arXiv listing abstract v2
- full text
- figures and tables
- references and citing sentences
- relations to other papers
- P abstract
- S sections
- T body sentences
- C citations
- R cross-paper relations
The paper
Original abstract
An emulator is a fast-to-evaluate statistical approximation of a detailed mathematical model (simulator). When used in lieu of simulators, emulators can expedite tasks that require many repeated evaluations, such as sensitivity analyses, policy optimization, model calibration, and value-of-information analyses. Emulators are developed using the output of simulators at specific input values (design points). Developing an emulator that closely approximates the simulator can require many design points, which becomes computationally expensive. We describe a self-terminating active learning algorithm to efficiently develop emulators tailored to a specific emulation task, and compare it with algorithms that optimize geometric criteria (random latin hypercube sampling and maximum projection designs) and other active learning algorithms (treed Gaussian Processes that optimize typical active learning criteria). We compared the algorithms' root mean square error (RMSE) and maximum absolute deviation from the simulator (MAX) for seven benchmark functions and in a prostate cancer screening model. In the empirical analyses, in simulators with greatly-varying smoothness over the input domain, active learning algorithms resulted in emulators with smaller RMSE and MAX for the same number of design points. In all other cases, all algorithms performed comparably. The proposed algorithm attained satisfactory performance in all analyses, had smaller variability than the treed Gaussian Processes (it is deterministic), and, on average, had similar or better performance as the treed Gaussian Processes in 6 out of 7 benchmark functions and in the prostate cancer model.
Human review
Discussion
Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.