Research article Special Issues

Comparison of the performance and reliability between improved sampling strategies for polynomial chaos expansion

  • + Contributed equally
  • Received: 01 February 2022 Revised: 28 March 2022 Accepted: 20 April 2022 Published: 19 May 2022
  • As uncertainty and sensitivity analysis of complex models grows ever more important, the difficulty of their timely realizations highlights a need for more efficient numerical operations. Non-intrusive Polynomial Chaos methods are highly efficient and accurate methods of mapping input-output relationships to investigate complex models. There is substantial potential to increase the efficacy of the method regarding the selected sampling scheme. We examine state-of-the-art sampling schemes categorized in space-filling-optimal designs such as Latin Hypercube sampling and L1-optimal sampling and compare their empirical performance against standard random sampling. The analysis was performed in the context of L1 minimization using the least-angle regression algorithm to fit the GPCE regression models. Due to the random nature of the sampling schemes, we compared different sampling approaches using statistical stability measures and evaluated the success rates to construct a surrogate model with relative errors of <0.1%, <1%, and <10%, respectively. The sampling schemes are thoroughly investigated by evaluating the y of surrogate models constructed for various distinct test cases, which represent different problem classes covering low, medium and high dimensional problems. Finally, the sampling schemes are tested on an application example to estimate the sensitivity of the self-impedance of a probe that is used to measure the impedance of biological tissues at different frequencies. We observed strong differences in the convergence properties of the methods between the analyzed test functions.

    Citation: Konstantin Weise, Erik Müller, Lucas Poßner, Thomas R. Knösche. Comparison of the performance and reliability between improved sampling strategies for polynomial chaos expansion[J]. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(8): 7425-7480. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022351

    Related Papers:

    [1] Michèle Siek, Berenice Marg, Chris M. Ehring, Derya Kirasi, Michael Liebthal, Thorsten Seidel . Interplay of vacuolar transporters for coupling primary and secondary active transport. AIMS Biophysics, 2016, 3(4): 479-500. doi: 10.3934/biophy.2016.4.479
    [2] Ashwani Kumar Vashishtha, William H. Konigsberg . Effect of different divalent cations on the kinetics and fidelity of DNA polymerases. AIMS Biophysics, 2018, 5(4): 272-289. doi: 10.3934/biophy.2018.4.272
    [3] Lars H. Wegner . Cotransport of water and solutes in plant membranes: The molecular basis, and physiological functions. AIMS Biophysics, 2017, 4(2): 192-209. doi: 10.3934/biophy.2017.2.192
    [4] Ashwani Kumar Vashishtha, William H. Konigsberg . The effect of different divalent cations on the kinetics and fidelity of Bacillus stearothermophilus DNA polymerase. AIMS Biophysics, 2018, 5(2): 125-143. doi: 10.3934/biophy.2018.2.125
    [5] Mahmoud Abdallat, Abdallah Barjas Qaswal, Majed Eftaiha, Abdel Rahman Qamar, Qusai Alnajjar, Rawand Sallam, Lara Kollab, Mohammad Masa'deh, Anas Amayreh, Hiba Mihyar, Hesham Aboushakra, Bayan Alkelani, Rawan Owaimer, Mohannad Abd-Alhadi, Salwa Ireiqat, Fahed Turk, Ahmad Daoud, Bashar Darawsheh, Ahmad Hiasat, Majd Alhalaki, Shahem Abdallat, Salsabiela Bani Hamad, Rand Murshidi . A mathematical modeling of the mitochondrial proton leak via quantum tunneling. AIMS Biophysics, 2024, 11(2): 189-233. doi: 10.3934/biophy.2024012
    [6] Ganesh Prasad Tiwari, Santosh Adhikari, Hari Prasad Lamichhane, Dinesh Kumar Chaudhary . Natural bond orbital analysis of dication magnesium complexes [Mg(H2O)6]2+ and [[Mg(H2O)6](H2O)n]2+; n=1-4. AIMS Biophysics, 2023, 10(1): 121-131. doi: 10.3934/biophy.2023009
    [7] Davide Sala, Andrea Giachetti, Antonio Rosato . Molecular dynamics simulations of metalloproteins: A folding study of rubredoxin from Pyrococcus furiosus. AIMS Biophysics, 2018, 5(1): 77-96. doi: 10.3934/biophy.2018.1.77
    [8] Ateeq Al-Zahrani, Natasha Cant, Vassilis Kargas, Tracy Rimington, Luba Aleksandrov, John R. Riordan, Robert C. Ford . Structure of the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator in the inward-facing conformation revealed by single particle electron microscopy. AIMS Biophysics, 2015, 2(2): 131-152. doi: 10.3934/biophy.2015.2.131
    [9] Stephanie H. DeLuca, Samuel L. DeLuca, Andrew Leaver-Fay, Jens Meiler . RosettaTMH: a method for membrane protein structure elucidation combining EPR distance restraints with assembly of transmembrane helices. AIMS Biophysics, 2016, 3(1): 1-26. doi: 10.3934/biophy.2016.1.1
    [10] Silvard Tadevosyan, Naira Sahakyan . Influence of menthol on membrane-associated properties of tetracycline-resistant Escherichia coli. AIMS Biophysics, 2024, 11(3): 329-339. doi: 10.3934/biophy.2024018
  • As uncertainty and sensitivity analysis of complex models grows ever more important, the difficulty of their timely realizations highlights a need for more efficient numerical operations. Non-intrusive Polynomial Chaos methods are highly efficient and accurate methods of mapping input-output relationships to investigate complex models. There is substantial potential to increase the efficacy of the method regarding the selected sampling scheme. We examine state-of-the-art sampling schemes categorized in space-filling-optimal designs such as Latin Hypercube sampling and L1-optimal sampling and compare their empirical performance against standard random sampling. The analysis was performed in the context of L1 minimization using the least-angle regression algorithm to fit the GPCE regression models. Due to the random nature of the sampling schemes, we compared different sampling approaches using statistical stability measures and evaluated the success rates to construct a surrogate model with relative errors of <0.1%, <1%, and <10%, respectively. The sampling schemes are thoroughly investigated by evaluating the y of surrogate models constructed for various distinct test cases, which represent different problem classes covering low, medium and high dimensional problems. Finally, the sampling schemes are tested on an application example to estimate the sensitivity of the self-impedance of a probe that is used to measure the impedance of biological tissues at different frequencies. We observed strong differences in the convergence properties of the methods between the analyzed test functions.



    Neuroblastoma (NB) presents as the most common and aggressive extracranial solid childhood tumor [1],[2]. This malignant tumor arises from neural crest progenitor cells. Primary lesions appear on the migration path of these cells during embryogenesis: abdomen (60–80%), chest (15%), neck (2–5%), pelvis (2–5%) [1],[2]. Pediatric NB accounts for 6–10% of all childhood cancers [1],[2]. The clinical prognosis varies from spontaneous regression to malignant progression [1],[2]. The most important and unfavorable clinical prognostic markers are over 18 months of age at diagnosis and an advanced tumor stage according to the International Neuroblastoma Staging System (INSS) [1][4]. NB can be considered a “genetic disease” [1][7]. In very rare familial neuroblastoma cases germline mutation in ALK or PHOX2B gene was identified [1][7]. A large number of recurrent somatic genetic alterations have been described in this tumor's tissue [8][12]. It has been determined that the spectrum of sequence variants associated with clinical outcome and therapeutic application includes the following genes: ALK, ATRX, ARID1, BARD1, LMO1, TERT, TP53 or RAS/MAPK signaling components [8][12]. Moreover, rapid tumor progression in NB is associated with MYCN amplification (MNA) and segmental chromosomal aberrations (SCA) [1][6]. MYCN amplification occurs in approximately 25% of all NBs and is the most powerful genetic predictor of poor outcome [1][6]. The incidence of SCA increases with NB's dissemination up to 59% in the most advanced 4 stage according to INSS [13][15]. Recent studies have shown that NB progression, especially to the bone marrow, is associated with accumulation of SCA in primary tumor cells, mostly in older patients. Alternatively, numerical chromosomal alterations (NCA) are observed more frequently in tumors of younger children, with localized disease and good prognosis [7],[13][16].

    The aim of the study was to identify NCA typical for NB. Over a few decades, well-defined SCA associated with poor prognosis in NB children have been established, e.g., loss of 1p, 3p, 4p, 6q, 9p, 11q, 15q, 18q and gain of 1q, 2p, 12q, 17q [1],[6],[13][16]. However, so far no studies have been undertaken to identify NCA that may group NB patients. Identifying effective diagnostic biomarkers for NB is particularly important, in order to optimize treatment. Recent technological advances, such as array CGH (array comparative genomic hybridization), enable the analysis of chromosomal markers in a single step and allow one to define genomic profiles associated with clinical features in NB [13],[17],[18].

    Pangenomic copy number profiling of NB primary tumors was performed with a cytogenetic microarray tool using DNA extracted from fresh samples (N = 94) and formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) specimens (N = 66). Biological samples were analyzed in the Laboratory of Molecular Genetics at the University Children's Hospital in Krakow from June 2016 to August 2021. FFPE tissues were initially de-waxed with xylene and subsequently washed with ethanol. Genomic DNA was extracted from samples with a DNA Tissue Kit (KURABO Industries Ltd, Osaka, JAP) and quantified by OD at 260 nm using a NanoDrop ND-1000 (NanoDrop Technologies, Inc., Wilmington, DE). A total of 200 ng of DNA was used for the manufacturer's array CGH protocol (SurePrint G3 CGH ISCA v2 8x60K, Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA). Copy number alterations in NB tumor genomes were identified using the dedicated software (CytoGenomics 2.9.2.4., Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA) and verified manually. A detection limit of 150 kb was established for appropriate detection of structural chromosomal abnormalities. Categorical variables were coded as a set of binary variables. The χ2-test was used to identify the variables, with a P-value of p ≤ 0.05.

    Among 160 NB tumors examined by array CGH, an NCA profile was observed in 72 (45%) cases (Figure 1a and Table 1) and 37 (23%) presented NCA combined with SCA (Figure 1b and Table 1). In analyzed patients 16 (10%) showed MNA in NB tumor tissue and in 35 (22%) patients a normal genomic profile was detected (Table 1). Among samples with NCA, the most frequent abnormalities were an additional copy of whole chromosome 17, 7 and 6 (78%, p = 0.000012; 65%, p = 0.003 and 51%, respectively), whereas copy-loss was observed mainly in chromosome 14, 4 and 19 (57%, p > 0.5; 47%, p = 0.02; 47%, respectively) (Table 1). A majority of NCA cases were under 18 months of age (87.5%, p = 0.000011) (Table 1). Similarly to NCA, patients with a combined NCA and SCA profile were also characterized by whole gain of chromosome 17 and 7 (35%) and loss of chromosome 14 (38%), but with lower frequency (Table 1). Additionally, in the combined NCA and SCA profiles, the loss of whole chromosome 3 (30%, p > 0.5) and 4 (24%) was observed. Moreover, in this NCA+SCA subgroup, typical NB changes such as 1p36 deletion (27%) and 17q gain (41%) were detected, and it was lower frequency than in MNA subgroup (44%) (Table 1). In this group of patients, 19 (51%) were over 18 months of age. In MNA subgroup no specific whole chromosome loss or gain was indicated, but 11q deletion started from the q14.3 subband in comparison to the q13.4 in NCA+SCA subgroup.

    Figure 1.  (a) Numerical chromosomal aberrations in NB tumor tissue; (b) Numerical and structural chromosomal aberrations in NB tumor tissue.
    Table 1.  The frequency of chromosomal alterations in the pangenomic profile of NB primary tumor tissue.
    Profile N = 160 Age > 18 Age < 18 The most frequent chromosomal alterations
    *NCA 72 (45%) 9 (12.5%) 63 (87.5%) +17 (56; 78%)
    +7 (47; 65%)
    +6 (37; 51%)
    +13 (31; 43%)
    +22 (26; 36%)
    +2 (25; 35%)
    +18 (24; 33%)
    +12 (22; 31%)
    −14 (41; 57%)
    −4 (34; 47%)
    −19 (34; 47%)
    −21 (31; 43%)
    −3 (26; 36%)
    **NCA + SCA 37 (23%) 19 (51%) 18 (49%) +7 (13; 35%)
    +17 (13; 35%)
    +18 (10; 27%)
    +22 (10; 27%)
    +12 (9; 24%)
    −14 (14; 38%)
    −3 (11; 30%)
    −4 (9; 24%)
    −9 (9; 24%)
    gain 17q (15; 41%)
    del 1p36 (10; 27%)
    del 11q13.4q25 (9; 24%)
    dup 1q2q44 (7; 17%)
    del 3p21p26 (6; 16%)
    ***MNA 16 (10%) 11 (69%) 5 (31%) gain 17q (7; 44%)
    del 1p36 (7; 44%)
    del 11q14.3.4q25 (3; 19%)
    Normal 35 (22%) 19 (54%) 16 (46%)

    Notes: *NCA: numerical chromosomal alterations; **NCA+SCA: numerical and segmental chromosomal alterations; ***MNA: MYCN amplification.

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    The study group of NB patients showed both NCA and NCA+SCA genomic profiles. The high occurrence of typical NB NCA such as a gain of whole chromosome 17 and 7 and chromosome 14 loss were previously described [19]. A similar frequency of chromosome 17 polysomy was identified by other authors in 23–100% of NB cases, chromosome 7 in 31–83% and the loss of chromosome 14 in more than 20% cases [16],[19][23]. The age in our NB patient subcohorts with NCA and NCA+SCA supports the hypothesis that NCA are more frequent in younger children with good prognosis, whereas SCA are more frequent in older patients with advanced stages of disease and poor outcomes [7],[13][16]. Tonini has supported the hypothesis that the initial step of oncogenesis in NB is the generation of whole chromosome gains, followed by segmental alterations [24],[25]. Conversely, the ‘aneuploidy paradox’ where polysomy/monosomy are presented in tumor tissue as indicators of tumor growth, but often lead to reduction in cell proliferation rate [26],[27]. However, there is still a need to evaluate aberration-related genes as molecular markers and their role in NB origin.

    The abnormal multiplication of whole chromosome 17 or its long arm (17q) in NB cells and other neoplasms may be related to the location of known oncogenes: HER2 (17q12), TOP2A (17q21.2) and TAU (17q21.31) in this chromosomal region. Gene HER2 amplification is widely utilized as a molecular marker of target treatment in breast cancer. Moreover, in breast cancer the amplification of TOP2A and TAU is also related to the response to anthracycline- and taxane-based chemotherapy [28]. However, nowadays the polysomy of chromosome 17 is not an independent predictive factor in NB, contrary to 17q gain, which occurs in 50–75% of NB and presents co-occurrence with the loss of 1p 3p, 4p, 9p, 11q and 14q as examples of unbalanced translocations [6],[7],[13][16]. Genes like NME1, BIRC5 and PPM1D were proposed as potential treatment targets in NB, but their role has not been proven [29],[30]. Moreover, TP53 (17p13) suppressor gene is the most frequently altered gene in human cancers [30].

    Stallings et al. have previously discussed the possibility that the gain of whole chromosome 7 or its long arm may contribute to tumorigenesis and progression in NB [22]. Chromosome 7 contains plenty of genes involved in cancer development: BRAF (7q34), CDK6 (7q21q22), EGFR (7p12), ETV1 (7p21.3), IKZF1 (7p12.2), MET (7q31), TRIM24 (7q32q34) [30]. High EGFR gene copy number status related to polysomy of chromosome 7 and EGFR-activating mutations were identified as positive molecular predictors for tyrosine kinase inhibitor responsiveness in non-small cell lung cancer and squamous cell carcinoma [31],[32].

    Long arm of chromosome 14 is a region containing IgH and ELK-2 genes, members of the ETS family of oncogenes, and AKT proto-oncogenes [30]. Previous reports suggest that one way of proto-oncogenes activation is a mutation or translocation leading to neoplastic transformation. Losses in 14q are typical in malignant meningiomas and are associated with more aggressive behavior and higher probability of tumor recurrence [33]. Also, for NB 14q deletion is more frequent (20–25%) than the loss of whole chromosome 14. Moreover, 14q loss strongly correlated with 11q loss, unfavorable alteration for NB tumors, and inversely correlated with MNA. Despite this, results do not show more aggressive behavior for patients with 14q deletions, and this alteration is not an independent prognostic marker [13][15],[34],[35].

    Deletion of 11q is one of the most frequent SCA reported in NB (35–45%). It is an independent prognostic factor associated with poor prognosis and metastatic disease [1],[6],[7],[13][16]. Moreover, ositive correlations of 11q loss with 4p loss and 7q gain, and an anti-correlation with MNA have been found [1],[2]. Beside this, it was reported that in 50% of 11q loss cases, deletion was the result of unbalanced translocation - concurrent loss of distal 11q and gain of 17q [36]. An effort was made to identify candidate genes for tumorigenesis in NB: ATM (11q22.3), SDHD (11q23.1), NCAM (11q23.2), CADM1 (11q23.3), H2AFX (11q23.3) and also CCND1 (11q13.3), PHOX2A (11q13.4) [1]. In this study, a difference in spanning 11q deletion between MNA and NCA+SCA subgroup was found (Table 1). Villamón et al. have previously reported the shortest regions of overlap for 11q deletion: from nucleotide 1117.7 Mb to qter (22.8 Mb) [37]. Based on our results, it is possible to outline other genes with loci in 11q13.4 as candidate markers in NB: CTTN (plays a role in the cytoskeleton organization and cell shape, cell migration, focal adhesion, the regulation of neuron morphology and axon growth, the invasiveness of cancer cells and the formation of metastases), NUMA (plays a role in the formation and organization of the mitotic spindle during cell division), FAM168A (protects cells from induced-DNA damage and apoptosis), PPFIA1 (plays a role in the focal adhesions), RPS3 (plays a role in the repair of damaged DNA) [38].

    The high incidence of whole chromosome 4 loss may indicate an additional unfavorable genetic factor in the NCA+SCA subgroup of NB patients. Chromosome 4 is the location for genes such as: FGF2 (implicated in nervous system development; 4q26), PHOX2B (a determinate of neurotransmitter phenotype, 4p12), REST (which represses neuronal genes in non-neuronal tissues, tumor suppressor; 4q12) [30]. Monosomy of chromosome 4 is rare in cancer. The loss of chromosome 4, predominantly in regions: 4p15.1–15.3, 4p16.3, 4q25–26 and 4q33–34 was characterized as a potential loci of suppressor genes which play a role in tumor pathogenesis and are associated with poor outcomes in breast, colorectal and lung cancer [39][41].

    Brinkschmidt et al. using the array CGH technique were one of the first to notice that the pattern of NCA in NB is not random, and irrespective of tumor stage, there is a strong trend towards an additional copy of chromosome: 2, 6, 7, 12, 13, 17, 18 and loss of chromosome: 3, 4, 11, 14 [42]. Brinkschmidt et al. have underlined that this pattern may be connected with up or down regulation of genes engaged in cell cycle and cell growth control [42].

    The clinical variability in NB course is strongly linked to diverse genetic changes acquired by tumor cells. To gain new insights into the pathogenesis of NB and to establish molecular targets for diagnosis and therapy, candidate genes in the altered chromosomal regions must be investigated.



    [1] N. Wiener, The Homogeneous Chaos, Am. J. Math., 60 (1938), 897. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2371268 doi: 10.2307/2371268
    [2] D. Xiu, G. E. Karniadakis, The Wiener–Askey Polynomial Chaos for Stochastic Differential Equations, SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 24 (2002), 619–644. http://dx.doi.org/10.1137/S1064827501387826 doi: 10.1137/S1064827501387826
    [3] O. P. Le Maître, O. M. Knio, Spectral methods for uncertainty quantification: With applications to computational fluid dynamics, Scientific computation. Springer, Dordrecht, ISBN 978-90-481-3519-6 (2010), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3520-2
    [4] M. Eldred, C. Webster, P. Constantine, Evaluation of Non-Intrusive Approaches for Wiener-Askey Generalized Polynomial Chaos, In 49th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, Virigina (2008). http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/6.2008-1892
    [5] I. M. Sobol', Y. Levitan, On the use of variance reducing multipliers in Monte Carlo computations of a global sensitivity index, Comput. Phys. Commun., 117 (1999), 52–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0010-4655(98)00156-8 doi: 10.1016/s0010-4655(98)00156-8
    [6] D. Xiu, Fast Numerical Methods for Stochastic Computations: A Review, Commun. Comput. Phys., 5 (2009), 242–272.
    [7] R. G. Ghanem, P. D. Spanos, Stochastic finite elements: A spectral approach. rev. ed. edition, Dover Publ, Mineola, NY, ISBN 9780486428185, (2003).
    [8] K. Weise, M. Carlstedt, M. Ziolkowski, H. Brauer, Uncertainty analysis in Lorentz force eddy current testing. IEEE Trans. Magn., 52 (2016), 1–4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TMAG.2015.2480046 doi: 10.1109/TMAG.2015.2480046
    [9] L. Codecasa, L. Di Rienzo, K. Weise, S. Gross, J. Haueisen, Fast MOR-Based Approach to Uncertainty Quantification in Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, IEEE Trans. Magn., 52 (2016), 1–4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TMAG.2015.2475120 doi: 10.1109/TMAG.2015.2475120
    [10] K. Weise, L. Di Rienzo, H. Brauer, J. Haueisen, H. Toepfer, Uncertainty analysis in transcranial magnetic stimulation using nonintrusive polynomial chaos expansion, IEEE Trans. Magn., 51 (2015), 1–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TMAG.2015.2390593 doi: 10.1109/TMAG.2015.2390593
    [11] G. B. Saturnino, A. Thielscher, K. H. Madsen, T. R. Knösche, K. Weise, A principled approach to conductivity uncertainty analysis in electric field calculations, NeuroImage, 188 (2019), 821–834. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.12.053 doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.12.053
    [12] K. Weise, O. Numssen, A. Thielscher, G. Hartwigsen, T. R. Knösche, A novel approach to localize cortical TMS effects, NeuroImage, 209 (2020), 116486. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116486 doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116486
    [13] K. Sepahvand, S. Marburg, H.-J. Hardtke, Stochastic free vibration of orthotropic plates using generalized polynomial chaos expansion, J. Sound Vib., 331 (2012), 167–179. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2011.08.012 doi: 10.1016/j.jsv.2011.08.012
    [14] S. Hosder, R. Walters, M. Balch, Efficient Sampling for Non-Intrusive Polynomial Chaos Applications with Multiple Uncertain Input Variables, In 48th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, Virigina, ISBN 978-1-62410-013-0 (2007). http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/6.2007-1939
    [15] A. Kaintura, T. Dhaene, D. Spina, Review of Polynomial Chaos-Based Methods for Uncertainty Quantification in Modern Integrated Circuits, Electronics, 7 (2018), 30. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/electronics7030030 doi: 10.3390/electronics7030030
    [16] P. Diaz, A. Doostan, J. Hampton, Sparse polynomial chaos expansions via compressed sensing and D-optimal design, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 336 (2018), 640–666. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2018.03.020 doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2018.03.020
    [17] H. N. Najm, Uncertainty Quantification and Polynomial Chaos Techniques in Computational Fluid Dynamics, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech., 41 (2009), 35–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/ANNUREV.FLUID.010908.165248 doi: 10.1146/ANNUREV.FLUID.010908.165248
    [18] K. M. Burk, A. Narayan, J. A. Orr, Efficient sampling for polynomial chaos-based uncertainty quantification and sensitivity analysis using weighted approximate Fekete points, Int. J. Numer. Method. Biomed. Eng., 36 (2020). http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cnm.3395 doi: 10.1002/cnm.3395
    [19] M. Grignard, C. Geuzaine, C. Phillips, Shamo: A Tool for Electromagnetic Modeling, Simulation and Sensitivity Analysis of the Head, Neuroinformatics, (2022). http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12021-022-09574-7 doi: 10.1007/s12021-022-09574-7
    [20] Z. Hu, D. Du, Y. Du, Generalized polynomial chaos-based uncertainty quantification and propagation in multi-scale modeling of cardiac electrophysiology. Comput. Biol. Med., 102 (2018), 57–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2018.09.006 doi: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2018.09.006
    [21] E. C. Massoud, Emulation of environmental models using polynomial chaos expansion, Environ. Model. Softw., 111 (2019), 421–431. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.10.008 doi: 10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.10.008
    [22] N. Pepper, L. Gerardo-Giorda, F. Montomoli, Meta-modeling on detailed geography for accurate prediction of invasive alien species dispersal, Sci. Rep., 9 (2019), 16237. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-52763-9 doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-52763-9
    [23] J. Son, D. Du, Y. Du, Modified Polynomial Chaos Expansion for Efficient Uncertainty Quantification in Biological Systems, Appl. Mech., 1 (2020), 153–173. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/applmech1030011 doi: 10.3390/applmech1030011
    [24] S. K. Sachdeva, P. B. Nair, A. J. Keane, Hybridization of stochastic reduced basis methods with polynomial chaos expansions, Probab. Eng. Mech., 21 (2006), 182–192. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.probengmech.2005.09.003 doi: 10.1016/j.probengmech.2005.09.003
    [25] X. Wan, G. E. Karniadakis, Multi-Element Generalized Polynomial Chaos for Arbitrary Probability Measures, SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 28 (2006), 901–928. http://dx.doi.org/10.1137/050627630 doi: 10.1137/050627630
    [26] G. Blatman, B. Sudret, Adaptive sparse polynomial chaos expansion based on least angle regression, J. Comput. Phys., 230 (2011), 2345–2367. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2010.12.021 doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2010.12.021
    [27] L. Novák, M. Vořechovský, V. Sadílek, M. D. Shields, Variance-based adaptive sequential sampling for Polynomial Chaos Expansion, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 386 (2021), 114105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2021.114105 doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2021.114105
    [28] M. D. McKay, R. J. Beckman, W. J. Conover, Comparison of Three Methods for Selecting Values of Input Variables in the Analysis of Output from a Computer Code, Technometrics, 21 (1979), 239–245. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00401706.1979.10489755 doi: 10.1080/00401706.1979.10489755
    [29] J. C. Helton, F. J. Davis, Latin hypercube sampling and the propagation of uncertainty in analyses of complex systems, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., 81 (2003), 23–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0951-8320(03)00058-9 doi: 10.1016/S0951-8320(03)00058-9
    [30] D. L. Donoho, Compressed sensing, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, 52 (2006), 1289–1306. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/tit.2006.871582 doi: 10.1109/tit.2006.871582
    [31] H. Rauhut, R. Ward, Sparse Legendre expansions via l1-minimization, J. Approximation Theory, 164 (2012), 517–533. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jat.2012.01.008 doi: 10.1016/j.jat.2012.01.008
    [32] J. Hampton, A. Doostan, Compressive sampling of polynomial chaos expansions: Convergence analysis and sampling strategies, J. Comput. Phys., 280 (2015), 363–386. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2014.09.019 doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2014.09.019
    [33] Z. Shu, P. Jirutitijaroen, Latin Hypercube Sampling Techniques for Power Systems Reliability Analysis With Renewable Energy Sources, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 26 (2011), 2066–2073. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2011.2113380 doi: 10.1109/TPWRS.2011.2113380
    [34] D. Robinson, C. Atcitty, 40th Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference and Exhibit. Reston, Virigina (04121999), http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/MSDM99
    [35] R. Jin, W. Chen, A. Sudjianto, {An Efficient Algorithm for Constructing Optimal Design of Computer Experiments}, In Volume 2: 29th Design Automation Conference, Parts A and B, 545–554. ASMEDC, ISBN 0-7918-3700-9 (09022003). http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/detc2003/dac-48760
    [36] M. E. Johnson, L. M. Moore, D. Ylvisaker, Minimax and maximin distance designs, J. Stat. Plann. Inference, 26 (1990), 131–148. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0378-3758(90)90122-b doi: 10.1016/0378-3758(90)90122-b
    [37] E. J. Candes, M. B. Wakin, An Introduction To Compressive Sampling, IEEE Signal Process Mag., 25 (2008), 21–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MSP.2007.914731 doi: 10.1109/MSP.2007.914731
    [38] E. J. Candès, J. K. Romberg, T. Tao, Stable signal recovery from incomplete and inaccurate measurements, Commun. Pure Appl. Math., 59 (2006), 1207–1223. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cpa.20124 doi: 10.1002/cpa.20124
    [39] M. Elad, Optimized Projections for Compressed Sensing, IEEE Trans. Signal Process., 55 (2007), 5695–5702. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/tsp.2007.900760 doi: 10.1109/tsp.2007.900760
    [40] M. Lustig, J. M. Santos, J.-H. Lee, D. L. Donoho, J. M. Pauly, Application of "Compressed Sensing" for Rapid MR Imaging (2005), Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/david_donoho/publication/249926097_application_of_compressed_sensing_for_rapid_mr_imaging
    [41] J. L. Paredes, G. R. Arce, Z. Wang, Ultra-Wideband Compressed Sensing: Channel Estimation, IEEE J. Sel. Top. Signal Process., 1 (2007), 383–395. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/JSTSP.2007.906657 doi: 10.1109/JSTSP.2007.906657
    [42] J. H. Ender, On compressive sensing applied to radar, Signal Process., 90 (2010), 1402–1414. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sigpro.2009.11.009 doi: 10.1016/j.sigpro.2009.11.009
    [43] G. Karagiannis, G. Lin, Selection of polynomial chaos bases via Bayesian model uncertainty methods with applications to sparse approximation of PDEs with stochastic inputs, J. Comput. Phys., 259 (2014), 114–134. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2013.11.016 doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2013.11.016
    [44] J. D. Jakeman, M. S. Eldred, K. Sargsyan, Enhancing 1 -minimization estimates of polynomial chaos expansions using basis selection, J. Comput. Phys., 289 (2015), 18–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2015.02.025 doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2015.02.025
    [45] G. Deman, K. Konakli, B. Sudret, J. Kerrou, P. Perrochet, H. Benabderrahmane, Using sparse polynomial chaos expansions for the global sensitivity analysis of groundwater lifetime expectancy in a multi-layered hydrogeological model, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., 147 (2016), 156–169. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2015.11.005 doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2015.11.005
    [46] R. Tibshirani, I. Johnstone, T. Hastie, B. Efron, Least angle regression, Ann. Stat., 32 (2004), 407–499. http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/009053604000000067 doi: 10.1214/009053604000000067
    [47] Y. C. Pati, R. Rezaiifar, P. S. Krishnaprasad, Orthogonal matching pursuit: Recursive function approximation with applications to wavelet decomposition, In Proceedings of 27th Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers, 40–44. IEEE Comput. Soc. Press, ISBN 0-8186-4120-7 (1-3 Nov, 1993). http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACSSC.1993.342465
    [48] E. J. Candès, The restricted isometry property and its implications for compressed sensing, C.R. Math., 346 (2008), 589–592. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.crma.2008.03.014 doi: 10.1016/j.crma.2008.03.014
    [49] N. Alemazkoor, H. Meidani, A near-optimal sampling strategy for sparse recovery of polynomial chaos expansions, J. Comput. Phys., 371 (2018), 137–151. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2018.05.025 doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2018.05.025
    [50] K. Weise, L. Poßner, E. Müller, R. Gast, T. R. Knösche, Pygpc: A sensitivity and uncertainty analysis toolbox for Python, SoftwareX, 11 (2020), 100450. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.softx.2020.100450 doi: 10.1016/j.softx.2020.100450
    [51] R. Askey, J. A. Wilson, Some basic hypergeometric orthogonal polynomials that generalize Jacobi polynomials, Memoirs of the American Mathematical Society, 54 (1985). http://dx.doi.org/10.1090/memo/0319 doi: 10.1090/memo/0319
    [52] J. Hampton, A. Doostan, Coherence motivated sampling and convergence analysis of least squares polynomial Chaos regression, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 290 (2015), 73–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2015.02.006 doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2015.02.006
    [53] A. M. Bruckstein, D. L. Donoho, M. Elad, From Sparse Solutions of Systems of Equations to Sparse Modeling of Signals and Images, SIAM Rev., 51 (2009), 34–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1137/060657704 doi: 10.1137/060657704
    [54] S. S. Chen, D. L. Donoho, M. A. Saunders, Atomic Decomposition by Basis Pursuit, SIAM Rev., 43 (2001), 129–159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1137/S003614450037906X doi: 10.1137/S003614450037906X
    [55] M. Hadigol, A. Doostan, Least squares polynomial chaos expansion: A review of sampling strategies, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 332 (2018), 382–407. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2017.12.019 doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2017.12.019
    [56] W. K. Hastings, Monte Carlo sampling methods using Markov chains and their applications, 50 (1970). http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2334940
    [57] F. Pukelsheim, Optimal design of experiments, SIAM, ISBN 0898716047 (2006).
    [58] A. C. Atkinson, Optimum experimental designs, with SAS, volume 34 of Oxford statistical science series, Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, ISBN 9780199296606 (2007).
    [59] M. D. Morris, T. J. Mitchell, Exploratory designs for computational experiments, J. Stat. Plann. Inference, 43 (1995), 381–402. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0378-3758(94)00035-t doi: 10.1016/0378-3758(94)00035-t
    [60] P. Audze, V. Eglais, New approach for planning out of experiments, Prob. Dyn. Str., (1977), 104–107.
    [61] S. Bates, J. Sienz, V. Toropov, Formulation of the Optimal Latin Hypercube Design of Experiments Using a Permutation Genetic Algorithm, In 45th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Palm Springs, California, ISBN 978-1-62410-079-6 (2004). http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/6.2004-2011
    [62] S.-K. Choi, R. V. Grandhi, R. A. Canfield, C. L. Pettit, Polynomial chaos expansion with Latin hypercube sampling for estimating response variability, AIAA J., 42 (2004), 1191–1198. http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/1.2220 doi: 10.2514/1.2220
    [63] M. Vořechovský, J. Eliáš, Modification of the Maximin and φp Criteria to Achieve Statistically Uniform Distribution of Sampling Points, Technometrics, 62 (2020), 371–386. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00401706.2019.1639550 doi: 10.1080/00401706.2019.1639550
    [64] J. Eliáš, M. Vořechovský, V. Sadílek, Periodic version of the minimax distance criterion for Monte Carlo integration, Adv. Eng. Software, 149 (2020), 102900. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2020.102900 doi: 10.1016/j.advengsoft.2020.102900
    [65] M. Vořechovský, J. Mašek, Distance-based optimal sampling in a hypercube: Energy potentials for high-dimensional and low-saturation designs, Adv. Eng. Software, 149 (2020), 102880. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2020.102880 doi: 10.1016/j.advengsoft.2020.102880
    [66] L. Gang, Z. Zhu, D. Yang, L. Chang, H. Bai, On Projection Matrix Optimization for Compressive Sensing Systems, IEEE Trans. Signal Process., 61 (2013), 2887–2898. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/tsp.2013.2253776 doi: 10.1109/tsp.2013.2253776
    [67] P. Virtanen, R. Gommers, T. E. Oliphant, M. Haberland, T. Reddy, D. Cournapeau, et al., SciPy 1.0: fundamental algorithms for scientific computing in Python, Nat. Methods, 17 (2020), 261–272. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2
    [68] T. Ishigami, T. Homma, An importance quantification technique in uncertainty analysis for computer models, In Uncertainty Modeling and Analysis, First International Symposium on (ISUMA '90) (ed. B. M. Ayyub), IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, ISBN 0818621079 (1990). http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/isuma.1990.151285
    [69] T. Crestaux, O. Le Maitre, J.-M. Martinez, Polynomial chaos expansion for sensitivity analysis. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., 94 (2009), 1161–1172. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2008.10.008 doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2008.10.008
    [70] A. Marrel, B. Iooss, B. Laurent, O. Roustant, Calculations of Sobol indices for the Gaussian process metamodel, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., 94 (2009), 742–751. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2008.07.008 doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2008.07.008
    [71] L. C. W. Dixon, G. P. Szego, The Global Optimization Problem: An Introduction, In Towards Global Optimisation 2, North-Holland Pub. Co, Amsterdam (1978).
    [72] M. Molga, C. Smutnicki, Test functions for optimization needs, (2015). http://new.zsd.iiar.pwr.wroc.pl/files/docs/functions.pdf
    [73] V. Picheny, T. Wagner, D. Ginsbourger, A benchmark of kriging-based infill criteria for noisy optimization, Struct. Multidiscip. Optim., 48 (2013), 607–626. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00158-013-0919-4 doi: 10.1007/s00158-013-0919-4
    [74] W. Li, Optimal Designs Using CP Algorithms, In Proceedings of the 2nd World Conference of the International Association for statistical computing, 130139 (1997).
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Aaron T Bozzi, Christina M Zimanyi, John M Nicoludis, Brandon K Lee, Casey H Zhang, Rachelle Gaudet, Structures in multiple conformations reveal distinct transition metal and proton pathways in an Nramp transporter, 2019, 8, 2050-084X, 10.7554/eLife.41124
    2. Aaron T. Bozzi, Lukas B. Bane, Christina M. Zimanyi, Rachelle Gaudet, Unique structural features in an Nramp metal transporter impart substrate-specific proton cotransport and a kinetic bias to favor import, 2019, 151, 0022-1295, 1413, 10.1085/jgp.201912428
    3. Aaron T. Bozzi, Rachelle Gaudet, Molecular Mechanism of Nramp-Family Transition Metal Transport, 2021, 00222836, 166991, 10.1016/j.jmb.2021.166991
    4. M. F. M. Cellier, Nramp: Deprive and conquer?, 2022, 10, 2296-634X, 10.3389/fcell.2022.988866
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2022 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(2785) PDF downloads(164) Cited by(0)

Figures and Tables

Figures(13)  /  Tables(43)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog