Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Global sensitivity analysis based on high-dimensional sparse surrogate construction

  • Published:
Applied Mathematics and Mechanics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Surrogate models are usually used to perform global sensitivity analysis (GSA) by avoiding a large ensemble of deterministic simulations of the Monte Carlo method to provide a reliable estimate of GSA indices. However, most surrogate models such as polynomial chaos (PC) expansions suffer from the curse of dimensionality due to the high-dimensional input space. Thus, sparse surrogate models have been proposed to alleviate the curse of dimensionality. In this paper, three techniques of sparse reconstruction are used to construct sparse PC expansions that are easily applicable to computing variance-based sensitivity indices (Sobol indices). These are orthogonal matching pursuit (OMP), spectral projected gradient for L 1 minimization (SPGL1), and Bayesian compressive sensing with Laplace priors. By computing Sobol indices for several benchmark response models including the Sobol function, the Morris function, and the Sod shock tube problem, effective implementations of high-dimensional sparse surrogate construction are exhibited for GSA.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Saltelli, A., Ratto, M., Andres, T., Campolongo, F., Cariboni, J., Gatelli, D., Saisana, M., and Tarantola, S. Global Sensitivity Analysis: the Primer, Wiley, England (2008)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Saltelli, A. Sensitivity analysis for importance assessment. Risk Analysis, 22, 579–590 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Sobol, I. M. Sensitivity estimates for nonlinear mathematical models. Mathematical Modeling and Computational Experiment, 1, 407–414 (1993)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Homma, T. and Saltelli, A. Importance measures in global sensitivity analysis of model output. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 52, 1–17 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Borgonovo, E. A new uncertainty importance measure. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 92, 771–784 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Saltelli, A. Making best use of model evaluations to compute sensitivity indices. Computer Physics Communication, 145, 280–297 (2002)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Wei, P., Lu, Z., and Yuan, X. Monte Carlo simulation for moment-independent sensitivity analysis. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 110, 60–67 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Oakley, J. E. and O’Hagan, A. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis of complex models: a Bayesian approach. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology), 66, 751–769 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Sudret, B. Global sensitivity analysis using polynomial chaos expansions. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 93, 964–979 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Xiu, D. and Karniadakis, G. E. The Wiener-Askey polynomial chaos for stochastic differential equations. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 24, 619–644 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Le Maitre, O. P. and Knio, O. M. Spectral Methods for Uncertainty Quantification: with Applications to Computational Fluid Dynamics, Springer, Netherlands (2010)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Blatman, G. and Sudret, B. An adaptive algorithm to build up sparse polynomial chaos expansions for stochastic finite element analysis. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics, 25, 183–197 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Blatman, G. and Sudret, B. Efficient computation of global sensitivity indices using sparse polynomial chaos expansions. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 95, 1216–1229 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Blatman, G. and Sudret, B. Adaptive sparse polynomial chaos expansion based on least angle regression. Journal of Computational Physics, 230, 2345–2367 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Cameron, R. and Martin, W. The orthogonal development of nonlinear functionals in series of Fourier-Hermite functionals. Annals of Mathematics, 48, 385–392 (1947)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Field, R. V. Numerical methods to estimate the coefficients of the polynomial chaos expnsion. Proceedings of the 15th ASCE Engineering Mechanics Conference, ASCE, New York (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Choi, S. K., Grandhi, R. V., Canfield, R. A., and Pettit, C. L. Polynomial chaos expansion with Latin hypercube sampling for estimating response variability. AIAA Journal, 45, 1191–1198 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Radović, I., Sobol, I. M., and Tichy, R. F. Quasi-Monte Carlo methods for numerical integration: comparison of different low discrepancy sequences. Monte Carlo Methods and Applications, 2, 1–14 (1996)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Smolyak, S. A. Quadrature and interpolation formulas for tensor products of certain classes of functions. Soviet Mathematics Doklady, 4, 240–243 (1963)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Foucart, S. and Rauhut, H. A Mathematical Introduction to Compressive Sensing, Springer, New York (2013)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Doostan, A. and Owhadi, H. A non-adapted sparse approximation of PDEs with stochastic inputs. Journal of Computational Physics, 230, 3015–3034 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Mathelin, L. and Callivan, K. A. A compressed sensing approach for partial differential equations with random input data. Communications in Computational Physics, 12, 919–954 (2012)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. Peng, J., Hampton, J., and Doostan, A. A weighted-minimization approach for sparse polynomial chaos expansions. Journal of Computational Physics, 267, 92–111 (2014)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Tropp, J. A. and Wright, S. J. Computational methods for sparse solution of linear inverse problems. Proceedings of the IEEE, 98, 948–958 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Mallat, S. and Zhang, Z. Matching pursuits with time-frequency dictionaries. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 41, 3397–3415 (1993)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Pati, Y. C., Rezaiifar, R., and Krishnaprasad, P. S. Orthogonal matching pursuit: recursive function approximation with applications to wavelet decomposition. The 27th Annual Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers, 1, 40–44 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Davis, G., Mallat, S., and Avellaneda, M. Adaptive greedy approximation. Constructive Approximation, 13, 57–98 (1997)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Needell, D. and Tropp, J. A. CoSaMP: iterative signal recovery from incomplete and inaccurate samples. Applied and Computational Harmonic Analysis, 26, 301–321 (2009).

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Chen, S., Donoho, D., and Saunders, M. Atomic decomposition by basis pursuit. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 20, 33–61 (1998)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Chen, S., Donoho, D., and Saunders, M. Atomic decomposition by basis pursuit. SIAM Review, 43, 129–159 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Donoho, D. L. and Tsaig, Y. Fast solution of l1-norm minimization problems when the solution may be sparse. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 54, 4789–4812 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Van den Berg, E. and Friedlander, M. Probing the Pareto frontier for basis pursuit solutions. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 31, 890–912 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Daubechies, I., DeVore, R., Fornasier, M., and Güntürk, C. S. Iteratively reweighted least squares minimization for sparse recovery. Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics, 63, 1–38 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. Efron, B., Hastie, T., Johnstone, I., and Tibshirani, R. Least angle regression. Annals of Statistics, 32, 407–499 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. Tipping, M. E. Sparse Bayesian learning and the relevance vector machine. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 1, 211–244 (2001)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Wipf, D. and Rao, B. Sparse Bayesian learning for basis selection. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 52, 2153–2164 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  37. Ji, S., Xue, Y., and Carin, L. Bayesian compressive sensing. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 56, 2346–2356 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  38. Babacan, S. D., Molina, R., and Katsaggelos, A. K. Bayesian compressive sensing using Laplace priors. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 19, 53–63 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  39. Cand`es, E., Romberg, J., and Tao, T. Robust uncertainty principles: exact signal reconstruction from highly incomplete frequency information. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 52, 489–509 (2006)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  40. Donoho, D. L. Compressed sensing. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 52, 1289–1306 (2006)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  41. Birgin, E. G., Martinez, J. M., and Raydan, M. Inexact spectral projected gradient methods on convex sets. IMA Journal of Numerical Analysis, 23, 539–559 (2003)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  42. Tipping, M. and Faul, A. Fast marginal likelihood maximisation for sparse Bayesian models. Proceedings of the Ninth International Workshop on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Florida (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Sobol, I. M., Turchaninov, V. I., Levitan, Y. L., and Shukhman, B. V. Quasi-Random Sequence Generators, Russian Acamdey of Sciences, Moscow (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Narayan, A. and Zhou, T. Stochastic collocation methods on unstructured meshes. Computer Physics Communication, 18, 1–36 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Sobol, I. M. Theorems and examples on high dimensional model representation. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 79, 187–193 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Sod, G. A. A Survey of several finite difference methods for systems of nonlinear hyperbolic conservation laws. Journal of Computational Physics, 27, 1–31 (1978)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Applied Physics and Computational Mathematics, Beijing, 100094, China

    Jun Hu & Shudao Zhang

Authors
  1. Jun Hu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shudao Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jun Hu.

Additional information

Project supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 11172049 and 11472060) and the Science Foundation of China Academy of Engineering Physics (Nos. 2015B0201037 and 2013A0101004)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hu, J., Zhang, S. Global sensitivity analysis based on high-dimensional sparse surrogate construction. Appl. Math. Mech.-Engl. Ed. 38, 797–814 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10483-017-2208-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10483-017-2208-8

Key words

Chinese Library Classification

2010 Mathematics Subject Classification

Search

Navigation