REVIEW 1 cited by
Error estimation for quasi-Monte Carlo
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Error estimation for quasi-Monte Carlo
read the original abstract
Quasi-Monte Carlo sampling can attain far better accuracy than plain Monte Carlo sampling. However, with plain Monte Carlo sampling it is much easier to estimate the attained accuracy. This article describes methods old and new to quantify the error in quasi-Monte Carlo estimates. An important challenge in this setting is that the goal of getting accuracy conflicts with that of estimating the attained accuracy. A related challenge is that rigorous uncertainty quantifications can be extremely conservative. A recent surprise is that some RQMC estimates have nearly symmetric distributions and that has the potential to allow confidence intervals that do not require either a central limit theorem or a consistent variance estimate.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
The $L_p$-error rate for randomized quasi-Monte Carlo self-normalized importance sampling of unbounded integrands
Rigorous Lp error bounds of order O(N^{-β+ε}) for RQMC self-normalized importance sampling with unbounded integrands on unbounded domains, with β near 1 under QMC-friendly growth conditions.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.