A new framework for comprehensive, robust, and efficient global sensitivity analysis: 1. Theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Computer simulation models are continually growing in complexity with increasingly more factors to be identified. Sensitivity Analysis (SA) provides an essential means for understanding the role and importance of these factors in producing model responses. However, conventional approaches to SA suffer from (1) an ambiguous characterization of sensitivity, and (2) poor computational efficiency, particularly as the problem dimension grows. Here, we present a new and general sensitivity analysis framework (called VARS), based on an analogy to “variogram analysis,” that provides an intuitive and comprehensive characterization of sensitivity across the full spectrum of scales in the factor space. We prove, theoretically, that Morris (derivative‐based) and Sobol (variance‐based) methods and their extensions are special cases of VARS, and that their SA indices can be computed as by‐products of the VARS framework. Synthetic functions that resemble actual model response surfaces are used to illustrate the concepts, and show VARS to be as much as two orders of magnitude more computationally efficient than the state‐of‐the‐art Sobol approach. In a companion paper, we propose a practical implementation strategy, and demonstrate the effectiveness, efficiency, and reliability (robustness) of the VARS framework on real‐data case studies.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".