Extension of Latin hypercube samples with correlated variables

Reliability Engineering and System Safety

Volumn 93, Issue 7, 2008, Pages 1047-1059

  Sallaberry, C J ^a   Helton, J C ^b   Hora, S C ^c  

^a SANDIA NATIONAL LABORATORIES   (United States)

^b ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII AT HILO   (United States)

Author keywords

Experimental design; Latin hypercube sample; Monte Carlo analysis; Rank correlation; Sample size extension; Sensitivity analysis; Uncertainty analysis

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL METHODS; CORRELATION METHODS; MATRIX ALGEBRA; MONTE CARLO METHODS; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS;

CORRELATION MATRIX; LATIN HYPERCUBE SAMPLE (LHS);

HYPERCUBE NETWORKS;

EID: 39749157769     PISSN: 09518320     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2007.04.005     Document Type: Article

References (90)

1. Christie M.A., Glimm J., Grove J.W., Higdon D.M., Sharp D.H., and Wood-Schultz M.M. Error analysis and simulations of complex phenomena. Los Alamos Sci 29 (2005) 6-25
2. Sharp D.H., and Wood-Schultz M.M. QMU and nuclear weapons certification: what's under the hood?. Los Alamos Sci 28 (2003) 47-53
3. Wagner R.L. Science, uncertainty and risk: the problem of complex phenomena. APS News 12 1 (2003) 8
4. Oberkampf W.L., DeLand S.M., Rutherford B.M., Diegert K.V., and Alvin K.F. Error and uncertainty in modeling and simulation. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 75 3 (2002) 333-357
5. Risk Assessment Forum. Guiding principles for Monte Carlo analysis, EPA/630/R-97/001 (1997), US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC (available from the NTIS as PB97-188106/XAB)
6. NCRP (National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements). A guide for uncertainty analysis in dose and risk assessments related to environmental contamination. NCRP Commentary No. 14. Bethesda, MD: National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements; 1996.
7. NRC (National Research Council). Science and judgment in risk assessment (1994), National Academy Press, Washington, DC
8. NRC (National Research Council). Issues in risk assessment (1993), National Academy Press, Washington, DC
9. US EPA (US Environmental Protection Agency). An SAB report: multi-media risk assessment for radon, review of uncertainty analysis of risks associated with exposure to radon, EPA-SAB-RAC-93-014 (1993), US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC
10. IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), 1989. Evaluating the reliability of predictions made using environmental transfer models, Safety Series No. 100. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.
11. Beck M.B. Water-quality modeling: a review of the analysis of uncertainty. Water Resourc Res 23 8 (1987) 1393-1442
12. Cacuci D.G. Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis, vol. 1: theory (2003), Chapman & Hall/CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL
13. Turányi T. Sensitivity analysis of complex kinetic systems. Tools and applications. J Math Chem 5 3 (1990) 203-248
14. Rabitz H., Kramer M., and Dacol D. Sensitivity analysis in chemical kinetics. In: Rabinovitch B.S., Schurr J.M., and Strauss H.L. (Eds). Annual review of physical chemistry vol. 34 (1983), Annual Reviews Inc., Palo Alto, CA 419-461
15. In: Lewins J., and Becker M. (Eds). Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis of reactor performance parameters vol. 14 (1982), Plenum Press, New York, NY
16. Frank P.M. Introduction to system sensitivity theory (1978), Academic Press, New York, NY
17. Tomovic R., and Vukobratovic M. General sensitivity theory (1972), Elsevier, New York, NY
18. Myers R.H., Montgomery D.C., Vining G.G., Borror C.M., and Kowalski S.M. Response surface methodology: a retrospective and literature review. J Qual Technol 36 1 (2004) 53-77
19. Myers R.H. Response surface methodology-current status and future directions. J Qual Technol 31 1 (1999) 30-44
20. Andres T.H. Sampling methods and sensitivity analysis for large parameter sets. J Stat Comput Simulat 57 1-4 (1997) 77-110
21. Kleijnen J.P.C. Sensitivity analysis and related analyses: a review of some statistical techniques. J Stat Comput Simulat 57 1-4 (1997) 111-142
22. Kleijnen J.P.C. Sensitivity analysis of simulation experiments: regression analysis and statistical design. Math Comput Simulat 34 3-4 (1992) 297-315
23. Sacks J., Welch W.J., Mitchel T.J., and Wynn H.P. Design and analysis of computer experiments. Stat Sci 4 4 (1989) 409-435
24. Morton R.H. Response surface methodology. Math Sci 8 (1983) 31-52
25. Mead R., and Pike D.J. A review of response surface methodology from a biometric viewpoint. Biometrics 31 (1975) 803-851
26. Myers R.H. Response surface methodology (1971), Allyn & Bacon, Boston, MA
27. Li G., Rosenthal C., and Rabitz H. High-dimensional model representations. J Phys Chem 105 33 (2001) 7765-7777
28. Rabitz H., and Alis O.F. General foundations of high-dimensional model representations. J Math Chem 25 2-3 (1999) 197-233
29. Saltelli A., Tarantola S., and Chan K.P.-S. A quantitative model-independent method for global sensitivity analysis of model output. Technometrics 41 1 (1999) 39-56
30. Sobol I.M. Sensitivity estimates for nonlinear mathematical models. Math Model Comput Exp 1 4 (1993) 407-414
31. Cukier R.I., Levine H.B., and Shuler K.E. Nonlinear sensitivity analysis of multiparameter model systems. J Comput Phys 26 1 (1978) 1-42
32. Helton J.C., Johnson J.D., Sallaberry C.J., and Storlie C.B. Survey of sampling-based methods for uncertainty and sensitivity analysis. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 91 10-11 (2006) 1175-1209
33. Helton J.C., and Davis F.J. Illustration of sampling-based methods for uncertainty and sensitivity analysis. Risk Anal 22 3 (2002) 591-622
34. Helton J.C., and Davis F.J. Sampling-based methods. In: Saltelli A., Chan K., and Scott E.M. (Eds). Sensitivity analysis (2000), Wiley, New York, NY 101-153
35. Kleijnen J.P.C., and Helton J.C. Statistical analyses of scatterplots to identify important factors in large-scale simulations, 1: review and comparison of techniques. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 65 2 (1999) 147-185
36. Blower S.M., and Dowlatabadi H. Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis of complex models of disease transmission: an HIV model, as an example. Int Stat Rev 62 2 (1994) 229-243
37. Saltelli A., Andres T.H., and Homma T. Sensitivity analysis of model output. An investigation of new techniques. Comput Stat Data Anal 15 2 (1993) 445-460
38. Iman R.L. Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis for computer modeling applications. In: Cruse T.A. (Ed). Reliability technology-1992, the winter annual meeting of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Anaheim, California, November 8-13, 1992 vol. 28 (1992), American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Aerospace Division, New York, NY 153-168
39. Saltelli A., and Marivoet J. Non-parametric statistics in sensitivity analysis for model output. A comparison of selected techniques. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 28 2 (1990) 229-253
40. Iman R.L., Helton J.C., and Campbell J.E. An approach to sensitivity analysis of computer models, Part 2. Ranking of input variables, response surface validation, distribution effect and technique synopsis. J Qual Technol 13 4 (1981) 232-240
41. Iman R.L., Helton J.C., and Campbell J.E. An approach to sensitivity analysis of computer models, Part 1. Introduction, input variable selection and preliminary variable assessment. J Qual Technol 13 3 (1981) 174-183
42. Iman R.L., and Conover W.J. Small sample sensitivity analysis techniques for computer models, with an application to risk assessment. Commun Stat: Theory Methods A 9 17 (1980) 1749-1842
43. Saltelli A., Ratto M., Tarantola S., and Campolongo F. Sensitivity analysis for chemical models. Chem Rev 105 7 (2005) 2811-2828
44. Ionescu-Bujor M., and Cacuci D.G. A comparative review of sensitivity and uncertainty analysis of large-scale systems-I: deterministic methods. Nucl Sci Eng 147 3 (2004) 189-2003
45. Cacuci D.G., and Ionescu-Bujor M. A comparative review of sensitivity and uncertainty analysis of large-scale systems-II: statistical methods. Nucl Sci Eng 147 3 (2004) 204-217
46. Frey H.C., and Patil S.R. Identification and review of sensitivity analysis methods. Risk Anal 22 3 (2002) 553-578
47. In: Saltelli A., Chan K., and Scott E.M. (Eds). Sensitivity analysis (2000), Wiley, New York, NY
48. Hamby D.M. A review of techniques for parameter sensitivity analysis of environmental models. Environ Monit Assess 32 2 (1994) 135-154
49. Helton J.C. Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis techniques for use in performance assessment for radioactive waste disposal. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 42 2-3 (1993) 327-367
50. Ronen Y. Uncertainty analysis (1988), CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, FL
51. Iman R.L., and Helton J.C. An investigation of uncertainty and sensitivity analysis techniques for computer models. Risk Anal 8 1 (1988) 71-90
52. Helton J.C., and Davis F.J. Latin hypercube sampling and the propagation of uncertainty in analyses of complex systems. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 81 1 (2003) 23-69
53. McKay M.D., Beckman R.J., and Conover W.J. A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code. Technometrics 21 2 (1979) 239-245
54. Garthwaite P.H., Kadane J.B., and O'Hagan A. Statistical methods for eliciting probability distributions. J Am Stat Assoc 100 470 (2005) 680-700
55. Cooke R.M., and Goossens L.H.J. Expert judgement elicitation for risk assessment of critical infrastructures. J Risk Res 7 6 (2004) 643-656
56. Ayyub B.M. Elicitation of expert opinions for uncertainty and risks (2001), CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL
57. McKay M., and Meyer M. Critique of and limitations on the use of expert judgements in accident consequence uncertainty analysis. Radiat Prot Dosim 90 3 (2000) 325-330
58. Goossens L.H.J., Harper F.T., Kraan B.C.P., and Metivier H. Expert judgement for a probabilistic accident consequence uncertainty analysis. Radiat Prot Dosim 90 3 (2000) 295-301
59. Budnitz R.J., Apostolakis G., Boore D.M., Cluff L.S., Coppersmith K.J., Cornell C.A., et al. Use of technical expert panels: applications to probabilistic seismic hazard analysis. Risk Anal 18 4 (1998) 463-469
60. Goossens L.H.J., and Harper F.T. Joint EC/USNRC expert judgement driven radiological protection uncertainty analysis. J Radiol Prot 18 4 (1998) 249-264
61. Siu N.O., and Kelly D.L. Bayesian parameter estimation in probabilistic risk assessment. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 62 1-2 (1998) 89-116
62. Evans J.S., Gray G.M., Sielken Jr. R.L., Smith A.E., Valdez-Flores C., and Graham J.D. Use of probabilistic expert judgement in uncertainty analysis of carcinogenic potency. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 20 1, Pt 1 (1994) 15-36
63. Thorne M.C. The use of expert opinion in formulating conceptual models of underground disposal systems and the treatment of associated bias. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 42 2-3 (1993) 161-180
64. Chhibber S., Apostolakis G., and Okrent D. A taxonomy of issues related to the use of expert judgments in probabilistic safety studies. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 38 1-2 (1992) 27-45
65. Otway H., and Winterfeldt D.V. Expert judgement in risk analysis and management: process, context, and pitfalls. Risk Anal 12 1 (1992) 83-93
66. Thorne M.C., and Williams M.M.R. A review of expert judgement techniques with reference to nuclear safety. Prog Nucl Saf 27 2-3 (1992) 83-254
67. Cooke R.M. Experts in uncertainty: opinion and subjective probability in science (1991), Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York
68. Meyer M.A., and Booker J.M. Eliciting and analyzing expert judgment: a practical guide (1991), Academic Press, New York, NY
69. Hora S.C., and Iman R.L. Expert opinion in risk analysis: the NUREG-1150 methodology. Nucl Sci Eng 102 4 (1989) 323-331
70. Iman R.L., and Conover W.J. A distribution-free approach to inducing rank correlation among input variables. Commun Stat: Simulat Comput B 11 3 (1982) 311-334
71. Iman R.L., and Davenport J.M. Rank correlation plots for use with correlated input variables. Commun Stat: Simulat Comput B 11 3 (1982) 335-360
72. Morris M.D. Three technometrics experimental design classics. Technometrics 42 1 (2000) 26-27
73. Tong C. Refinement strategies for stratified sampling methods. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 91 10-11 (2006) 1257-1265
74. Helton J.C., Martell M.-A., and Tierney M.S. Characterization of subjective uncertainty in the 1996 performance assessment for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 69 1-3 (2000) 191-204
75. Iman R.L. Statistical methods for including uncertainties associated with the geologic isolation of radioactive waste which allow for a comparison with licensing criteria. In: Kocher D.C. (Ed). Proceedings of the symposium on uncertainties associated with the regulation of the geologic disposal of high-level radioactive waste, NUREG/CP-0022; CONF-810372 (1981), US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Directorate of Technical Information and Document Control, Gatlinburg, TN; Washington, DC 145-157
76. W. Feller, An introduction to probability theory and its applications, vol. 2, 2nd ed. New York, NY: Wiley, 1971.
77. US NRC (US Nuclear Regulatory Commission). Severe accident risks: an assessment for five US nuclear power plants, NUREG-1150 vols. 1-3 (1990-1991), US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, Division of Systems Research, Washington, DC
78. Breeding R.J., Helton J.C., Gorham E.D., and Harper F.T. Summary description of the methods used in the probabilistic risk assessments for NUREG-1150. Nucl Eng Des 135 1 (1992) 1-27
79. Breeding R.J., Helton J.C., Murfin W.B., Smith L.N., Johnson J.D., Jow H.-N., et al. The NUREG-1150 probabilistic risk assessment for the Surry Nuclear Power Station. Nucl Eng Des 135 1 (1992) 29-59
80. Payne Jr. A.C., Breeding R.J., Helton J.C., Smith L.N., Johnson J.D., Jow H.-N., et al. The NUREG-1150 probabilistic risk assessment for the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station. Nucl Eng Des 135 1 (1992) 61-94
81. Gregory J.J., Breeding R.J., Helton J.C., Murfin W.B., Higgins S.J., and Shiver A.W. The NUREG-1150 probabilistic risk assessment for the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant. Nucl Eng Des 135 1 (1992) 92-115
82. Brown T.D., Breeding R.J., Helton J.C., Jow H.-N., Higgins S.J., and Shiver A.W. The NUREG-1150 probabilistic risk assessment for the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station. Nucl Eng Des 135 1 (1992) 117-137
83. Payne Jr. A.C. Analysis of the LaSalle Unit 2 Nuclear Power Plant: Risk Methods Integration and Evaluation Program (RMIEP). Summary, NUREG/CR-4832; SAND92-0537 vol. 1 (1992), Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM
84. US DOE (US Department of Energy). Title 40, CFR Part 191, Compliance certification application for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, DOE/CAO-1996-2184 vols. I-XXI (1996), US Department of Energy, Carlsbad Area Office, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, Carlsbad, NM
85. Helton J.C., and Marietta M.G. Special issue: the 1996 performance assessment for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 69 1-3 (2000) 1-451
86. Civilian Radioactive Waste Management System Management and Operating Contractor (CRWMS M&O). Total system performance assessment for the site recommendation, TDR-WIS-PA-000001 REV 00 (2000), CRWMS M&O, Las Vegas, NV
87. US DOE (US Department of Energy). Viability assessment of a repository at Yucca Mountain, DOE/RW-0508 (1998), US Department of Energy, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, Washington, DC
88. Iman R.L., and Helton J.C. The repeatability of uncertainty and sensitivity analyses for complex probabilistic risk assessments. Risk Anal 11 4 (1991) 591-606
89. Helton J.C., Johnson J.D., McKay M.D., Shiver A.W., and Sprung J.L. Robustness of an uncertainty and sensitivity analysis of early exposure results with the MACCS reactor accident consequence model. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 48 2 (1995) 129-148
90. Helton J.C., Davis F.J., and Johnson J.D. A comparison of uncertainty and sensitivity analysis results obtained with random and Latin hypercube sampling. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 89 3 (2005) 305-330