Adaptive sampling with a Lipschitz criterion for accurate metamodeling

Lipschitz Sampling, unlike standard space lling strategies (Minimax and Maximin distance, Integrated Mean Squared Error, Eadze-Eglais, etc.) for producing good metamodels, incorporates information from output evaluation in order to estimate in some sense the local complexity of the function at hand. The complexity indicator considered is a suitable denition of local Lipschitz constant. New points are proposed to be evaluated where the product of the local Lipschitz constant by the distance from the nearest already evaluated point is maximum. Benchmarks are proposed on standard test functions in comparison with standard space lling strategies. Smaller prediction errors are obtained by Lipschitz sampling when the function considered shows sudden variations in some part of the domain and varies more slowly in other regions.

[1]  Richard J. Beckman,et al.  A Comparison of Three Methods for Selecting Values of Input Variables in the Analysis of Output From a Computer Code , 2000, Technometrics.

[2]  Yong Zhang,et al.  Uniform Design: Theory and Application , 2000, Technometrics.

[3]  M. D. McKay,et al.  A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code , 2000 .

[4]  Alberto Lovison,et al.  Extracting optimal datasets for metamodelling and perspectives for incremental samplings , 2010, Math. Comput. Simul..

[5]  Carl E. Rasmussen,et al.  Gaussian processes for machine learning , 2005, Adaptive computation and machine learning.

[6]  Saltelli Andrea,et al.  Sensitivity Analysis for Nonlinear Mathematical Models. Numerical ExperienceSensitivity Analysis for Nonlinear Mathematical Models. Numerical Experience , 1995 .

[7]  Douglas C. Montgomery,et al.  Response Surface Methodology: Process and Product Optimization Using Designed Experiments , 1995 .

[8]  William J. Welch,et al.  Screening the Input Variables to a Computer Model Via Analysis of Variance and Visualization , 2006 .

[9]  Donald R. Jones,et al.  A Taxonomy of Global Optimization Methods Based on Response Surfaces , 2001, J. Glob. Optim..

[10]  David P. Dobkin,et al.  The quickhull algorithm for convex hulls , 1996, TOMS.

[11]  Thomas J. Santner,et al.  Design and analysis of computer experiments , 1998 .

[12]  Derek J. Pike,et al.  Empirical Model‐building and Response Surfaces. , 1988 .

[13]  I. Sobol,et al.  A pseudo-random number generator for personal computers , 1999 .

[14]  Karen A. F. Copeland Experiments: Planning, Analysis, and Parameter Design Optimization , 2002 .

[15]  George E. P. Box,et al.  Empirical Model‐Building and Response Surfaces , 1988 .

[16]  M. E. Johnson,et al.  Minimax and maximin distance designs , 1990 .

[17]  R. Lempert,et al.  Shaping the Next One Hundred Years: New Methods for Quantitative Long-Term Policy Analysis , 2003 .

[18]  Yaroslav D. Sergeyev,et al.  Global Search Based on Efficient Diagonal Partitions and a Set of Lipschitz Constants , 2006, SIAM J. Optim..

[19]  Ruichen Jin,et al.  On Sequential Sampling for Global Metamodeling in Engineering Design , 2002, DAC 2002.