A New Framework for Effective and Efficient Global Sensitivity Analysis of Earth and Environmental Systems Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this presentation, we propose a new approach to sensitivity analysis that addresses the dual aspects of ‘effectiveness’ and ‘efficiency’. By effective, we mean achieving an assessment that is both meaningful and clearly reflective of the objective of the analysis (the first challenge above), while by efficiency we mean achieving statistically robust results with minimal computational cost (the second challenge above). Based on this approach, we develop a ‘global’ sensitivity analysis framework that efficiently generates a newly-defined set of sensitivity indices that characterize a range of important properties of metric ‘response surfaces’ encountered when performing SA on EES models. Further, we show how this framework embraces, and is consistent with, a spectrum of different concepts regarding ‘sensitivity’, and that commonly-used SA approaches (e.g., Sobol, Morris, etc.) are actually limiting cases of our approach under specific conditions. Multiple case studies are used to demonstrate the value of the new framework. The results show that the new framework provides a fundamental understanding of the underlying sensitivities for any given problem, while requiring orders of magnitude fewer model runs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".