The DOI matches its Crossref record; 64 of the 64 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Convergence and uncertainty analyses in Monte-Carlo based sensitivity analysis
Abstract
Sensitivity analysis plays an important role in model development, calibration, uncertainty analysis, scenario analysis, and, hence, decision making. With the availability of different sensitivity analysis techniques, selecting an appropriate technique, monitoring the convergence and estimating the uncertainty of the sensitivity indices are very crucial for environmental modelling, especially for distributed models due to their high non-linearity, non-monotonicity, highly correlated parameters, and intensive computational requirements. It would be useful to identify whether some techniques outperform others with respect to computational requirements, reliability, and other criteria. This paper proposes two methods to monitor the convergence and estimate the uncertainty of sensitivity analysis techniques. One is based on the central limit theorem and the other on the bootstrap technique. These two methods are implemented to assess five different sensitivity analysis techniques applied to an environmental model. These techniques are: the Sobol' method, the Morris method, Linear Regression (LR), Regionalized Sensitivity Analysis (RSA), and non-parametric smoothing. The results show that: (i) the Sobol' method is very robust in quantifying sensitivities and ranking parameters despite a large number of model evaluations; (ii) the Morris method is efficient to rank out unimportant parameters at a medium cost; (iii) the non-parametric smoothing is reliable and robust in quantifying the main effects and low-order interactions while requiring a small number of model evaluations; finally (iv) the other two techniques, that is, LR and RSA, should be used with care.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I — A discussion of principles
Nash, J. E., & Sutcliffe, J. V. (1970) · Journal of Hydrology · doi:10.1016/0022-1694(70)90255-6 · Cited by 23,674
(1973) · CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) · Cited by 12,895
On Estimation of a Probability Density Function and Mode
Parzen, E. (1962) · The Annals of Mathematical Statistics · doi:10.1214/aoms/1177704472 · Cited by 10,585
Response Surface Methodology: Process and Product Optimization Using Designed Experiments
Gunst, R. F., Myers, R. H., & Montgomery, D. C. (1996) · Technometrics · doi:10.2307/1270613 · Cited by 9,530
Design and Analysis of Computer Experiments
Sacks, J., Welch, W. J., Mitchell, T. J., & Wynn, H. P. (1989) · Statistical Science · doi:10.1214/ss/1177012413 · Cited by 6,919
Global Sensitivity Analysis. The Primer
Saltelli, A., Ratto, M., Andres, T., Campolongo, F., Cariboni, J., Gatelli, D., Saisana, M., & Tarantola, S. (2007) · doi:10.1002/9780470725184 · Cited by 6,430
Factorial Sampling Plans for Preliminary Computational Experiments
Morris, M. D. (1991) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1991.10484804 · Cited by 4,943
Spline Models for Observational Data.
Muller, H.-G., & Wahba, G. (1991) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2290434 · Cited by 4,928
The future of distributed models: model calibration and uncertainty prediction
Beven, K., & Binley, A. (1992) · Hydrological Processes · doi:10.1002/hyp.3360060305 · Cited by 4,527
Pattern Classification and Scene Analysis
Thompson, M., Duda, R. O., & Hart, P. E. (1974) · Leonardo · doi:10.2307/1573081 · Cited by 4,495
Cited by
Characterising performance of environmental models
Bennett, N. D., Croke, B. F. W., Guariso, G., Guillaume, J. H. A., Hamilton, S. H., Jakeman, A. J., Marsili-Libelli, S., Newham, L. T. H., Norton, J. P., Perrin, C., et al. (2013) · Environmental Modelling & Software · doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2012.09.011 · Cited by 1,536
An overview of methods to evaluate uncertainty of deterministic models in decision support
Uusitalo, L., Lehikoinen, A., Helle, I., & Myrberg, K. (2015) · Environmental Modelling & Software · doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2014.09.017 · Cited by 538
Sensitivity analysis methods in the biomedical sciences
Qian, G., & Mahdi, A. (2020) · Mathematical Biosciences · doi:10.1016/j.mbs.2020.108306 · Cited by 169
Metadata
- Authors
- Yang, J.
- Venue
- Environmental Modelling & Software
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2011-04
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 444-457
- ISSN
- 1364-8152 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2041202986
- Cited by
- 326
- References
- 64
- FWCI
- 17.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Convergence and uncertainty analyses in Monte-Carlo based sensitivity analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.envsoft.2010.10.007
- The paper
- Yang, J. (2011). Convergence and uncertainty analyses in Monte-Carlo based sensitivity analysis. Environmental Modelling & Software. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2010.10.007
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.