Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 38 references

Nested Simulation Methods for Sobol' Index Estimation: Bias Correction, Budget Allocation, and Latin Hypercube Sampling

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-07-08 · grok-4.5

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read A split jackknife nested estimator recovers the canonical O(N^{-1}) MSE rate for Sobol' index numerators under crude Monte Carlo.

desk verdict Clean nested-simulation unification of pick-freeze and jackknife Sobol' estimators; the CMC rate separation is real under standard conditions, not a free lunch for black-box simulators. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.05809 v1 pith:FA25GNJT submitted 2026-07-07 stat.ME

Jingtao Zhang , Xi Chen This is my paper
classification stat.ME MSC 62G0565C0562F12
keywords Sobol'indicesnestedsimulationjackknifebiascorrectionbudgetallocationLatinhypercubesamplingglobalsensitivityanalysispick-freezeestimatorsvarianceofconditionalexpectation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper recasts classical Sobol' index estimation as a nested-simulation problem and shows that several standard pick-freeze estimators are simply nested estimators whose inner sample sizes are fixed by design. From that common vantage point the authors compare bias and variance under a shared computational budget N. They analyze the usual nested Monte Carlo estimator of the Sobol' numerator and introduce two jackknife corrections: an unbiased jackknife and a split jackknife that uses an independent pilot sample for the outer mean. Under crude Monte Carlo the split jackknife, with a suitable outer/inner allocation, attains the ordinary Monte Carlo MSE rate O(N^{-1}); the plain nested estimator and the unbiased jackknife remain stuck at the slower nested-simulation rate. The paper also maps how Latin hypercube sampling changes the picture: it can help the plain nested estimator yet can destroy the bias cancellation of the jackknife methods unless the inner size grows with N. The practical payoff is a clear ranking of estimators and sampling designs for global sensitivity analysis when every simulation call is expensive.

What carries the argument

The split jackknife nested estimator: an outer sample of conditional expectations is estimated by independent inner replications; a leave-one-out jackknife corrects the squared-mean bias, while an independent pilot sample estimates the overall mean so that the jackknife correction does not re-introduce dependence that would spoil the rate. Optimal outer/inner allocation then converts the usual nested bias-variance trade-off into the ordinary Monte Carlo rate.

What would settle it

Under crude Monte Carlo with total budget N, plot log-MSE versus log-N for the split jackknife (optimal allocation) against the standard nested and unbiased jackknife estimators; if the split jackknife slope is not asymptotically -1 while the others remain steeper, the central rate claim is false.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Under crude Monte Carlo, the split jackknife nested estimator of the Sobol' index numerator attains the canonical MSE rate O(N^{-1}) under an appropriate outer/inner budget allocation, whereas the standard nested simulation estimator and the unbiased jackknife estimator attain only the slower nested-simulation rate. Several classical pick-freeze estimators are nested estimators with fixed inner-level sample sizes, so the same budget-allocation analysis applies to them directly.

Load-bearing premise

The claimed rate separation rests on technical moment and growth conditions (finite moments of the conditional expectation and of the inner estimator, and suitable growth of the inner sample size with total budget) that are assumed rather than verified for general black-box simulators.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Under a fixed simulation budget the split jackknife is the preferred nested estimator for Sobol' numerators when sampling is crude Monte Carlo.
  • Classical pick-freeze schemes can be ranked against nested estimators by treating their fixed inner sizes as special cases of the same budget allocation.
  • Latin hypercube sampling can improve the plain nested estimator but requires the inner sample size to grow with N if jackknife bias reduction is to be retained.
  • Practitioners gain concrete outer/inner allocation rules that convert the usual nested-simulation MSE into the ordinary Monte Carlo rate.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same split-jackknife construction may lift other nested estimators of variance-of-conditional-expectation functionals (e.g., conditional value-at-risk or nested risk measures) from the nested rate to the canonical rate.
  • When the black-box simulator itself admits a low-discrepancy or multilevel structure, combining the split jackknife with multilevel Monte Carlo could further reduce constants while preserving the O(N^{-1}) rate.
  • If moment conditions fail, diagnostic residual plots of the estimated conditional expectations against inner sample size could flag when the rate separation collapses and force a more conservative allocation.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper revisits Sobol' index estimation from a nested-simulation perspective. It shows that several classical pick-freeze estimators can be interpreted as nested simulation estimators with fixed inner-level sample sizes, enabling a unified bias–variance comparison under a common computational budget. Building on that view, the authors analyze the standard nested estimator of the Sobol' numerator and introduce two jackknife-based extensions: an unbiased jackknife estimator and a split jackknife estimator that uses an independent preliminary sample to estimate the mean. Under crude Monte Carlo they derive MSE rates and outer/inner budget allocations, claiming that the split jackknife attains the canonical rate O(N^{-1}) under an appropriate allocation while the standard nested and unbiased jackknife estimators attain only the slower nested-simulation rate. They further characterize the effect of Latin hypercube sampling, which can improve the standard nested estimator but may undermine jackknife bias reduction unless the inner sample size grows with total budget. Numerical experiments are used to corroborate the theory and to give practical guidance on estimator selection under CMC and LHS.

Significance. If the rate and allocation results hold under the stated conditions, the paper offers a useful methodological unification of the pick-freeze and nested-simulation literatures for Sobol' index estimation, together with a concrete recommendation favoring the split jackknife when a canonical MSE rate is desired under CMC. The explicit budget-allocation characterizations and the LHS caveats (including the warning that LHS can undo jackknife bias reduction) are practically relevant and go beyond a pure asymptotic exercise. The work is self-contained and methodological rather than application-driven; its main value is the rate separation, the nested reinterpretation of pick-freeze estimators, and the comparative guidance under a common budget. Numerical corroboration of the asymptotic claims is a clear strength.

major comments (2)
  1. [CMC rate analysis and budget-allocation sections (split jackknife vs. standard nested / unbiased jackknife)] The central CMC rate separation—that the split jackknife nested estimator of the Sobol' numerator attains MSE O(N^{-1}) under an appropriate outer/inner allocation, while the standard nested and unbiased jackknife estimators attain only the slower nested-simulation rate—rests on nested-simulation regularity (finite higher moments of the conditional expectation μ(X)=E[Y|X] and of the inner-level estimator, and suitable growth of the inner sample size m with total budget N). These conditions appear as technical hypotheses in the CMC-rate and budget-allocation analysis rather than as consequences of primitive assumptions on a general black-box simulator. The main rate theorem(s) should state these hypotheses explicitly and the surrounding discussion should briefly indicate when they may fail (e.g., heavy-tailed conditional moments, insufficient growth of m), so that the scope of the claimed
  2. [Definition of the split jackknife estimator and associated CMC allocation analysis] The split jackknife uses an independent preliminary sample to estimate the mean. The total-budget accounting and the optimal outer/inner allocation that deliver the O(N^{-1}) rate must include the cost of that preliminary sample; if the preliminary sample is treated as free or is omitted from N, the claimed rate and allocation are not comparable to the other estimators under a common computational budget. Please make the budget identity and the resulting allocation explicit in the statement of the rate result and in the numerical design.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section establishing pick-freeze estimators as fixed-m nested estimators] In the pick-freeze-as-nested reinterpretation, state clearly for each classical estimator which fixed inner-level sample size m it corresponds to and whether the outer design is shared or independent, so that the common-budget comparison is unambiguous.
  2. [LHS analysis section] When discussing LHS, separate more sharply the effect on variance of the standard nested estimator from the effect on the bias expansion of the jackknife estimators; the abstract’s caveat that jackknife bias reduction can be undermined unless m grows with N should be mirrored by a short, explicit statement next to the corresponding theorem or proposition.
  3. [Notation and setup] Notation for the Sobol' numerator, the conditional expectation μ(X), the inner estimator, and the total budget N should be fixed early and used consistently; occasional switches between “inner replications” and “inner sample size m” make the allocation formulas harder to parse.
  4. [Numerical experiments] In the numerical experiments, report the precise outer/inner allocations used for each estimator (including the preliminary-sample size for the split jackknife) and the number of independent macro-replications, so that the MSE curves can be checked against the predicted rates.
  5. [Introduction / related work] A short related-work paragraph situating the jackknife constructions relative to existing bias-correction devices for nested estimation of Var(E[Y|X]) would help readers place the contribution.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for a careful and constructive report. The two major comments concern (i) explicit statement of the nested-simulation regularity conditions underlying the CMC rate separation and a brief discussion of their scope, and (ii) transparent total-budget accounting for the independent preliminary sample used by the split jackknife. Both points improve clarity and comparability under a common computational budget. We will revise the main CMC-rate and allocation statements, the surrounding discussion, and the numerical design accordingly. We believe these changes fully address the referee’s concerns while preserving the paper’s main contributions: the nested reinterpretation of pick-freeze estimators, the rate separation under CMC, the associated outer/inner allocations, and the LHS caveats.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central CMC rate separation—that the split jackknife nested estimator of the Sobol' numerator attains MSE O(N^{-1}) under an appropriate outer/inner allocation, while the standard nested and unbiased jackknife estimators attain only the slower nested-simulation rate—rests on nested-simulation regularity (finite higher moments of the conditional expectation μ(X)=E[Y|X] and of the inner-level estimator, and suitable growth of the inner sample size m with total budget N). These conditions appear as technical hypotheses in the CMC-rate and budget-allocation analysis rather than as consequences of primitive assumptions on a general black-box simulator. The main rate theorem(s) should state these hypotheses explicitly and the surrounding discussion should briefly indicate when they may fail (e.g., heavy-tailed conditional moments, insufficient growth of m), so that the scope of the claimed

    Authors: We agree. The CMC rate separation and the associated outer/inner allocations are established under nested-simulation regularity: finite higher moments of μ(X)=E[Y|X] and of the inner-level estimator, together with a suitable growth condition on the inner sample size m relative to the total budget N. In the revised manuscript we will state these hypotheses explicitly in the main CMC-rate theorem(s) (and in the corresponding allocation corollaries), rather than leaving them only in technical lemmas or intermediate arguments. We will also add a short discussion of scope: the O(N^{-1}) claim for the split jackknife can fail if conditional moments of μ(X) or of the inner estimator are infinite (heavy tails), or if m does not grow sufficiently with N so that the residual bias/variance terms do not become negligible at the claimed rate. We will note that these conditions are standard in the nested-simulation literature and are typically satisfied for simulators with bounded or light-tailed responses, while remaining assumptions on the black-box model rather than consequences of fully primitive structural hypotheses. No change is made to the rate statements themselves; the revision is one of explicitness and scope. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The split jackknife uses an independent preliminary sample to estimate the mean. The total-budget accounting and the optimal outer/inner allocation that deliver the O(N^{-1}) rate must include the cost of that preliminary sample; if the preliminary sample is treated as free or is omitted from N, the claimed rate and allocation are not comparable to the other estimators under a common computational budget. Please make the budget identity and the resulting allocation explicit in the statement of the rate result and in the numerical design.

    Authors: We agree that comparability under a common computational budget requires that the cost of the independent preliminary sample be included in N. In the revised manuscript we will make the budget identity explicit in the statement of the split-jackknife CMC rate result and in the associated allocation analysis: if n_pre denotes the preliminary sample size used to estimate the mean, n the outer sample size, and m the inner sample size, then the total budget satisfies N = n_pre + n·m (up to the usual constant factors for the paired inputs in the Sobol' numerator), and the O(N^{-1}) rate is obtained under an allocation in which n_pre, n, and m all grow with N in a manner we will state explicitly (with n_pre of lower order than N when that is optimal, so that the preliminary cost does not dominate). We will likewise revise the numerical design so that reported budgets and MSE curves for the split jackknife count the preliminary sample, ensuring a fair comparison with the standard nested and unbiased jackknife estimators under the same N. If any current wording could be read as treating the preliminary sample as free, it will be corrected. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: methodological MSE-rate and bias expansions for nested Sobol' estimators follow from nested-simulation structure and jackknife identities under stated regularity conditions.

full rationale

The paper is a self-contained methodological contribution in stochastic simulation. It reinterprets classical pick-freeze Sobol' estimators as nested estimators with fixed inner sample size, then derives bias expansions, MSE rates, and outer/inner budget allocations for the standard nested estimator, an unbiased jackknife estimator, and a split jackknife estimator under CMC and LHS. The central claim—that under suitable allocation the split jackknife attains the canonical O(N^{-1}) MSE rate while the others attain only the slower nested-simulation rate—is obtained from standard asymptotic expansions that impose finite higher moments of the conditional expectation and of the inner-level estimator together with suitable growth of the inner size m with total budget N. These are technical regularity hypotheses, not circular definitions of the target quantities, not parameters fitted to data and then relabeled as predictions, and not uniqueness results imported solely from the authors’ prior work. Estimators are defined independently of the rates they are later shown to achieve; numerical experiments corroborate rather than close a definitional loop. No self-definitional, fitted-input-as-prediction, load-bearing self-citation, uniqueness-import, ansatz-smuggling, or renaming-of-known-result circularity is present. Score 0 is the honest finding.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free physical parameters. The claim rests on standard Monte Carlo and nested-simulation regularity (finite moments, asymptotic expansions of bias/variance of sample means of conditional expectations) and on the classical definition of Sobol' indices / pick-freeze identities. No new particles or forces; 'invented' objects are estimator constructions (unbiased jackknife, split jackknife with pilot mean), which are methods not physical entities.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Sobol' index numerator equals a variance of a conditional expectation (or equivalent pick-freeze covariance identity).
    Standard global sensitivity analysis; used to frame the estimation target throughout.
  • domain assumption Nested-simulation regularity: finite moments of the conditional expectation and of the inner-level estimator; bias/variance expansions as functions of outer size n and inner size m.
    Needed for asymptotic MSE rates and optimal n,m allocations under total budget N.
  • standard math Jackknife bias-reduction identities for U-statistic / nested sample-mean functionals under CMC.
    Classical jackknife theory applied to the nested estimator of Var(E[Y|X]).
  • domain assumption Latin hypercube sampling dependence structure and its effect on variance and on jackknife bias terms when m is fixed vs growing.
    Used for the LHS section claiming improvement of standard nested and potential loss of jackknife unbiasedness unless m grows with budget.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Nested Simulation Methods for Sobol' Index Estimation: Bias Correction, Budget Allocation, and Latin Hypercube Sampling." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FA25GNJT

@misc{pith2026260705809,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Nested Simulation Methods for Sobol' Index Estimation: Bias Correction, Budget Allocation, and Latin Hypercube Sampling},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FA25GNJT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.05809}
}
read the original abstract

Estimating the variance of a conditional expectation is a recurring problem in stochastic simulation, with applications in global sensitivity analysis and Sobol' index estimation. This paper revisits Sobol' index estimation through the lens of nested simulation and develops a unified comparison of classical pick-freeze estimators and nested simulation estimators under a common computational budget. We show that several standard pick-freeze estimators can be interpreted as nested simulation estimators with fixed inner-level sample sizes, enabling direct performance comparisons and clarifying their bias-variance behavior. Building on this perspective, we analyze the standard nested simulation estimator for the Sobol' index numerator and propose two jackknife-based extensions: an unbiased jackknife estimator and a split jackknife estimator that uses an independent preliminary sample to estimate the mean. Under crude Monte Carlo (CMC), the split jackknife estimator attains the canonical mean squared error (MSE) rate, whereas the standard nested simulation and unbiased jackknife estimators attain the slower nested simulation rate. We also characterize the associated allocations of outer- and inner-level simulation effort. Finally, we study the impact of Latin hypercube sampling (LHS), showing that it can improve the standard nested simulation estimator while undermining bias reduction in jackknife-based estimators unless the inner-level sample size grows with the total budget. Numerical experiments corroborate the theory and provide practical guidance on estimator selection for Sobol' index estimation under CMC and LHS.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.05809 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Log–log MSE under CMC (y-axis) versus total budget [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Log–log MSE under CMC (y-axis) versus total budget [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Log–log MSE under CMC (y-axis) versus total budget [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Log–log MSE under CMC (y-axis) versus total budget [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Log–log MSE under LHS (y-axis) versus total budget [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Log–log MSE under LHS (y-axis) versus total budget [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Log–log MSE under LHS (y-axis) versus total budget [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Log–log MSE under LHS (y-axis) versus total budget [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_8.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    and Staum, Jeremy , title =

    Sun, Yunpeng and Apley, Daniel W. and Staum, Jeremy , title =. Operations Research , volume =

    work page

  2. [2]

    and Juneja, Sandeep , title =

    Gordy, Michael B. and Juneja, Sandeep , title =. Management Science , volume =

    work page

  3. [3]

    INFORMS Journal on Computing , volume =

    Liang, Guo and Zhang, Kun and Luo, Jun , title =. INFORMS Journal on Computing , volume =

    work page

  4. [4]

    Matematicheskoe Modelirovanie , volume=

    On Sensitivity Estimation for Nonlinear Mathematical Models , author=. Matematicheskoe Modelirovanie , volume=. 1990 , publisher=

    work page 1990

  5. [5]

    Environmental Modelling & Software , volume=

    How to Avoid a Perfunctory Sensitivity Analysis , author=. Environmental Modelling & Software , volume=. 2010 , publisher=

    work page 2010

  6. [6]

    Reliability Engineering & System Safety , volume=

    Estimating the Approximation Error When Fixing Unessential Factors in Global Sensitivity Analysis , author=. Reliability Engineering & System Safety , volume=. 2007 , publisher=

    work page 2007

  7. [7]

    Variance Based Sensitivity Analysis of Model Output

    Saltelli, Andrea and Annoni, Paola and Azzini, Ivano and Campolongo, Francesca and Ratto, Marco and Tarantola, Stefano , journal=. Variance Based Sensitivity Analysis of Model Output. 2010 , publisher=

    work page 2010

  8. [8]

    SIAM/ASA Journal on Uncertainty Quantification , volume=

    A Trade-off between Explorations and Repetitions for Estimators of Two Global Sensitivity Indices in Stochastic Models Induced by Probability Measures , author=. SIAM/ASA Journal on Uncertainty Quantification , volume=. 2021 , publisher=

    work page 2021

Show all 38 references
  1. [9]

    Asymptotic Normality and Efficiency of Two

    Janon, Alexandre and Klein, Thierry and Lagnoux, Agnes and Nodet, Ma. Asymptotic Normality and Efficiency of Two. ESAIM: Probability and Statistics , volume=. 2014 , publisher=

    2014

  2. [10]

    , title =

    Owen, Art B. , title =. ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation , pages=. 2013 , volume =

    2013

  3. [11]

    An Importance Quantification Technique in Uncertainty Analysis for Computer Models , year=

    Ishigami, Tsutoomu and Homma, Toshimitsu , booktitle=. An Importance Quantification Technique in Uncertainty Analysis for Computer Models , year=

  4. [12]

    Statistical inference for

    Gamboa, Fabrice and Janon, Alexandre and Klein, Thierry and Lagnoux, Agn. Statistical inference for. Statistics , volume=. 2016 , publisher=

    2016

  5. [13]

    Hydrology and Earth System Sciences , volume=

    A framework for development and application of hydrological models , author=. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences , volume=. 2001 , publisher=

    2001

  6. [14]

    Computers & Structures , volume=

    Adaptive sparse polynomial chaos expansions for global sensitivity analysis based on support vector regression , author=. Computers & Structures , volume=. 2018 , publisher=

    2018

  7. [15]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.05885 , year=

    Surrogate-based global sensitivity analysis with statistical guarantees via floodgate , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.05885 , year=

    arXiv

  8. [16]

    Hydrological Processes , volume=

    Understanding the time-varying importance of different uncertainty sources in hydrological modelling using global sensitivity analysis , author=. Hydrological Processes , volume=. 2016 , publisher=

    2016

  9. [17]

    Journal of hydrology , volume=

    River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I—A discussion of principles , author=. Journal of hydrology , volume=. 1970 , publisher=

    1970

  10. [18]

    I. M. Sobol' and E. E. Myshetskaya , pages =. Monte Carlo Methods and Applications , year =

  11. [19]

    Large Sample Properties of Simulations Using

    Michael Stein , journal =. Large Sample Properties of Simulations Using

  12. [20]

    Reliability Engineering & System Safety , volume =

    Calculations of. Reliability Engineering & System Safety , volume =. 2009 , author =

    2009

  13. [21]

    Operations Research Letters , volume =

    Computing the variance of a conditional expectation via non-nested. Operations Research Letters , volume =. 2017 , author =

    2017

  14. [22]

    SIAM/ASA Journal on Uncertainty Quantification , volume =

    Qian, Elizabeth and Peherstorfer, Benjamin and O'Malley, Daniel and Vesselinov, Velimir V and Willcox, Karen , title =. SIAM/ASA Journal on Uncertainty Quantification , volume =

  15. [23]

    Operations Research , volume =

    Zhang, Kun and Liu, Guangwu and Wang, Shiyu , title =. Operations Research , volume =

  16. [24]

    and Teng, J

    Quan, Z. and Teng, J. and Sun, W. and Cheng, T. and Zhang, J. , TITLE =. Proceedings of the International Association of Hydrological Sciences , VOLUME =. 2015 , PAGES =

    2015

  17. [25]

    Environmental Modelling & Software , volume =

    A. Environmental Modelling & Software , volume =. 2015 , author =

    2015

  18. [26]

    Owen , year = 2018, title =

    Art B. Owen , year = 2018, title =

    2018

  19. [27]

    Reliability Engineering & System Safety , volume =

    Adaptive use of replicated. Reliability Engineering & System Safety , volume =. 2021 , author =

    2021

  20. [28]

    Estimating

    Tissot, Jean-Yves and Prieur, Cl\'ementine , journal=. Estimating

  21. [29]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:1505.02350 , year=

    Exploring multi-dimensional spaces: A comparison of Latin hypercube and quasi Monte Carlo sampling techniques , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:1505.02350 , year=

    arXiv

  22. [30]

    Iterative estimation of

    Gilquin, Laurent and Prieur, Cl. Iterative estimation of. Computational and Applied Mathematics , volume=. 2021 , publisher=

    2021

  23. [31]

    2019 , author =

    Making the best use of permutations to compute sensitivity indices with replicated orthogonal arrays , journal =. 2019 , author =

    2019

  24. [32]

    2020 , author =

    A framework for global reliability sensitivity analysis in the presence of multi-uncertainty , journal =. 2020 , author =

    2020

  25. [33]

    International Journal for Uncertainty Quantification , volume=

    A comprehensive comparison of total-order estimators for global sensitivity analysis , author=. International Journal for Uncertainty Quantification , volume=. 2022 , pages =

    2022

  26. [34]

    Exploiting deterministic algorithms to perform global sensitivity analysis of continuous-time

    Kouye, Henri Mermoz and Mazo, Gildas and Prieur, Cl. Exploiting deterministic algorithms to perform global sensitivity analysis of continuous-time. arXiv preprint arXiv:2202.07277 , year=

  27. [35]

    and Choe, Youngjun , journal=

    Liu, Zhanlin and Banerjee, Ashis G. and Choe, Youngjun , journal=. Identifying the Influential Inputs for Network Output Variance Using Sparse Polynomial Chaos Expansion , year=

  28. [36]

    The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment , volume=

    Variance-based global sensitivity analysis and beyond in life cycle assessment: an application to geothermal heating networks , author=. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment , volume=. 2021 , publisher=

    2021

  29. [37]

    SIAM/ASA Journal on Uncertainty Quantification , volume=

    Multilevel nested simulation for efficient risk estimation , author=. SIAM/ASA Journal on Uncertainty Quantification , volume=. 2019 , publisher=

    2019

  30. [38]

    and Beckman, Richard J

    McKay, Michael D. and Beckman, Richard J. and Conover, William J. , title =. Technometrics , volume =

Pith tools

Reviewed July 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.