This paper investigated the expected approximation error in function recovery via a novel class of non-uniform-volume partitions. We established two main theoretical results. First, we proved a strong partition principle showing that stratified sampling based on our proposed non-uniform-volume partitions yielded a strictly smaller expected approximation error than classical jittered sampling:
$ \mathbb{E}\|f - \mathcal{A}_Z f\| < \mathbb{E}\|f - \mathcal{A}_Y f\|, $
where $ Z $ and $ Y $ denoted random samples drawn from the non-uniform-volume and jittered designs, respectively, and $ \mathcal{A} $ denoted the piecewise-constant approximation operator. Second, we derived explicit, dimension-explicit upper bounds on the expected approximation error under our non-uniform-volume partition framework—bounds that improved upon the best-known rates for jittered sampling at the constant level. We wish to emphasize that the improvement was at the constant level only: the asymptotic convergence rate $ \mathcal{O}(N^{-1/2-1/(2d)}) $ remained unchanged from classical jittered sampling. Nevertheless, we believed that constant-level improvements can be practically significant and theoretically illuminating. Collectively, these results offered a theoretical basis for the use of non-uniform-volume partitions in high-dimensional function approximation and sampling theory.
Citation: Xiaoda Xu. The partition principle revisited: Non-equal volume designs achieve minimal expected approximation error in function sampling[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2026, 11(6): 15448-15468. doi: 10.3934/math.2026635
This paper investigated the expected approximation error in function recovery via a novel class of non-uniform-volume partitions. We established two main theoretical results. First, we proved a strong partition principle showing that stratified sampling based on our proposed non-uniform-volume partitions yielded a strictly smaller expected approximation error than classical jittered sampling:
$ \mathbb{E}\|f - \mathcal{A}_Z f\| < \mathbb{E}\|f - \mathcal{A}_Y f\|, $
where $ Z $ and $ Y $ denoted random samples drawn from the non-uniform-volume and jittered designs, respectively, and $ \mathcal{A} $ denoted the piecewise-constant approximation operator. Second, we derived explicit, dimension-explicit upper bounds on the expected approximation error under our non-uniform-volume partition framework—bounds that improved upon the best-known rates for jittered sampling at the constant level. We wish to emphasize that the improvement was at the constant level only: the asymptotic convergence rate $ \mathcal{O}(N^{-1/2-1/(2d)}) $ remained unchanged from classical jittered sampling. Nevertheless, we believed that constant-level improvements can be practically significant and theoretically illuminating. Collectively, these results offered a theoretical basis for the use of non-uniform-volume partitions in high-dimensional function approximation and sampling theory.
| [1] |
S. Yang, D. Meng, H. Yang, B. Keshtegar, A. D. Jesus, S. P. Zhu, Adaptive Kriging-assisted enhanced sparrow search with augmented-Lagrangian first-order reliability method for highly efficient structural reliability analysis, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Safe., 267 (2026), 111916. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2025.111916 doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2025.111916
|
| [2] |
M. Kiderlen, F. Pausinger, On a partition with a lower expected $L_{2}$-discrepancy than classical jittered sampling, J. Complexity, 70 (2022), 101616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jco.2021.101616 doi: 10.1016/j.jco.2021.101616
|
| [3] | H. Niederreiter, Random number generation and quasi-Monte Carlo methods, SIAM, 1992. https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9781611970081 |
| [4] |
B. Doerr, A sharp discrepancy bound for jittered sampling, Math. Comp., 91 (2022), 1871–1892. https://doi.org/10.1090/mcom/3727 doi: 10.1090/mcom/3727
|
| [5] | E. Novak, Deterministic and stochastic error bounds in numerical analysis, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 1988. https://doi.org/10.1007/bfb0079792 |
| [6] |
F. Pausinger, S. Steinerberger, On the discrepancy of jittered sampling, J. Complexity, 33 (2016), 199–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jco.2015.11.003 doi: 10.1016/j.jco.2015.11.003
|
| [7] |
J. Xian, X. Xu, Improved expected $L_2$-discrepancy formulas on jittered sampling, Anal. Appl., 23 (2025), 1469–1499. https://doi.org/10.1142/s0219530525500125 doi: 10.1142/s0219530525500125
|
| [8] |
J. Zhang, W. Chen, R. Yang, Birnbaum-Saunders parameters estimation using simple random sampling and ranked set sampling, Commun. Stat. Simul. Comput., 54 (2025), 3624–3643. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610918.2024.2360682 doi: 10.1080/03610918.2024.2360682
|
| [9] | F. J. Hickernell, What affects the accuracy of quasi-Monte Carlo quadrature? In: Monte Carlo and quasi-monte carlo methods 1998, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 2000, 16–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-59657-5_2 |
| [10] | A. B. Owen, Multidimensional variation for quasi-Monte Carlo, In: Contemporary multivariate analysis and design of experiments, World Scientific, 2005, 49–74. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812567765_0004 |
| [11] |
M. D. McKay, R. J. Beckman, W. J. Conover, A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code, Technometrics, 21 (1979), 239–245. https://doi.org/10.2307/1268522 doi: 10.2307/1268522
|
| [12] | K. T. Fang, R. Li, A. Sudjianto, Design and modeling for computer experiments, New York: Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420034899 |
| [13] |
B. Doerr, M. Gnewuch, A. Srivastav, Bounds and constructions for the star-discrepancy via $\delta$-covers, J. Complexity, 21 (2005), 691–709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jco.2005.05.002 doi: 10.1016/j.jco.2005.05.002
|
| [14] |
M. Gnewuch, Bracketing numbers for axis-parallel boxes and applications to geometric discrepancy, J. Complexity, 24 (2008), 154–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jco.2007.08.003 doi: 10.1016/j.jco.2007.08.003
|
| [15] |
J. Neyman, On the two different aspects of the representative method: The method of stratified sampling and the method of purposive selection, J. Royal Statist. Soc., 97 (1934), 558–625. https://doi.org/10.2307/2342192 doi: 10.2307/2342192
|
| [16] | V. V. Fedorov, Theory of optimal experiments, Academic Press, 1972. |
| [17] | J. F. Traub, G. W. Wasilkowski, H. Woźniakowski, Information-based complexity, London: Academic Press, 1988. Available from: https://library-search.imperial.ac.uk/permalink/44IMP_INST/17uma66/alma993522404401591. |
| [18] |
H. Woźniakowski, Average case complexity of multivariate integration, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc., 24 (1991), 185–194. https://doi.org/10.1090/s0273-0979-1991-15985-9 doi: 10.1090/s0273-0979-1991-15985-9
|