Design for Computer Experiments: Comparing and Generating Designs in Kriging Models

  • Giovanni Pistone
  • Grazia Vicario


The selection of design points is mandatory when the goal is to study how the observed response varies upon changing the set of input variables. In physical experimentation, the researcher is asked to investigate a number of issues to gain valuable inferences. Design of experiments (D.o.E.) is a helpful tool for achieving this goal. Unfortunately, designing a computer experiment (CE), used as a surrogate for the physical one, differs in several aspects from designing a physical experiment. As suggested by the pioneers of CEs, the output can be predict by assuming Gaussian responses and that covariance depends parametrically on the distance between the locations, according to the Kriging model. Latin hypercube (LH) training sets are used in most cases. In this chapter, we discuss the influence of LHs on the prediction error of the conditional expectation step of the Kriging model using examples. Our suggestion is to perform these preliminary tests in order to assess which class of LH seems to fit the specific application.


Design Point Computer Experiment Ordinary Kriging Multivariate Normal Distribution Kriging Model 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Box, G.E.P., Draper, N.R.: Empirical Model-Building and Response Surface. Wiley, New York (1987)Google Scholar
  2. Cressie, N.A.: Statistics for Spatial Data. Wiley, New York (1993)Google Scholar
  3. Cressie, N.A.: Spatial prediction and ordinary kriging. Math. Geol. 20(4), 407-421 (1997)Google Scholar
  4. Kleijnen, J.: Statistical Tools for Simulation Practitioners. Marcel Dekker, New York (1987)MATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Krige, D.G.: A statistical approach to some mine valuations and allied problems at the Witwatersrand. Master’s Thesis, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg (1951)Google Scholar
  6. Matheron, G.: The theory of regionalized variables and its applications. Les Cahiers du Centre de Morphologie Mathematiques de Fontainbleau (France) 5 (1971)Google Scholar
  7. Mc Kay, M.D., Beckman, R.J., Conover, W.J.: A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of out put from a computer code. Technometrics 21, 239–245 (1979)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. Loh, W.-L.: On latin hypercube sampling. Ann. Stat. 28, 2058–2080 (1996)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. Park, S., Fowler, J.W., Mackulak, G.T., Keats, J.B., Carlyle, W.M.M.: D-optimal sequential experiments for generating a simulation-based cycle time-throughput curve. Oper. Res. 50, 6, 981–990 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Sacks, J., Schiller, S.B., Welch, W.J.: Design for computer experiments. Technometrics 31, 41–47 (1989a)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. Sacks, J., Welch, W.J., Mitchell, T.J., Wynn. H.P.: Design and analysis of computer experiments. Stat. Sci. 4, 409–423 (1989b)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. Santner, T.J., Williams, B.J., Notz, W.I.: The design and analysis of computer experiments. Springer-Verlag, New York (2003)MATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Sasena, M.J., Papalambros, P., Goovaerts, P.: Exploration of metamodeling sampling criteria for constrained global optimization. Eng. Optimiz. 34, 3, 263–278 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Zienkiewicz, O.C.: The Finite Element Method in Engineering Science. McGraw-Hill, New York (1971)MATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Giovanni Pistone
    • 1
  • Grazia Vicario
    • 1
  1. 1.Politecnico di Torino, Department of MathematicsTorinoItaly

Personalised recommendations