2021
DOI: 10.1214/20-aap1638
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Discrepancy bounds for a class of negatively dependent random points including Latin hypercube samples

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
26
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 58 publications
1
26
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For the upper bound, the original proof of Heinrich et al does not easily reveal information on C. Aistleitner [Ais11] gave an alternative, more direct proof that also shows that with positive probability, D * (P ) ≤ 10 √ dN. The currently strongest estimate, lowering the 10 to 2.525, is due to Gnewuch and Hebbinghaus [GH21]. For the lower bound, the elementary proof of [Doe14] clearly can be made more precise and then give a reasonable constant, but this has not been done so far.…”
Section: Estimates For the Star Discrepancymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…For the upper bound, the original proof of Heinrich et al does not easily reveal information on C. Aistleitner [Ais11] gave an alternative, more direct proof that also shows that with positive probability, D * (P ) ≤ 10 √ dN. The currently strongest estimate, lowering the 10 to 2.525, is due to Gnewuch and Hebbinghaus [GH21]. For the lower bound, the elementary proof of [Doe14] clearly can be made more precise and then give a reasonable constant, but this has not been done so far.…”
Section: Estimates For the Star Discrepancymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The two most prominent such dependent randomized constructions are Latin hypercube samplings [MBC79] and jittered sampling (also called stratified sampling) [Bel81,CPC84]. The first analysis of the discrepancy of such a construction in the modern paradigm of making the influence on d explicit was conducted by Pausinger and Steinerberger [PS16], who showed the following bounds (we note that Latin hypercube samples were later analyzed in [DDG18,GH21]).…”
Section: Jittered Samplingmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…There one simply substitutes the random variables U (i) j in (2) by constant values 1 2 . The negative dependence properties of LHS were investigated in [4].…”
Section: Latin Hypercube Samplingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently, there has been some research in this direction. In [4,5] the authors showed that a specific negative dependence property of RQMC point sets guarantees that they satisfy the same pre-asymptotic probabilistic discrepancy bounds (with explicitly revealed dependence on the number of points N as well as on the dimension d) as MC points. Here the negative dependence property relies on the common distribution of all sample points.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%