An efficient local search-based genetic algorithm for constructing optimal Latin hypercube design

References

• Audze, P., and V. Eglais. 1977. “New Approach for Planning Out of Experiments.” Problems of Dynamics and Strengths 35: 104–107. (in Russian)
   Google Scholar
• Ba, S., W. R. Myers, and W. A. Brenneman. 2015. “Optimal Sliced Latin Hypercube Designs.” Technometrics 57 (4): 479–487.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bates, S. J., J. Sienz, and D. S. Langley. 2003. “Formulation of the Audze–Eglais Uniform Latin Hypercube Design of Experiments.” Advances in Engineering Software 34 (8): 493–506.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burnaev, E., I. Panin, and B. Sudret. 2017. “Efficient Design of Experiments for Sensitivity Analysis Based on Polynomial Chaos Expansions.” Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 81 (1–2): 187–207.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chakraborty, S., and R. Chowdhury. 2016. “Sequential Experimental Design Based Generalised ANOVA.” Journal of Computational Physics 317: 15–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, R. B., D. N. Hsieh, and Y. Hung. 2013. “Optimizing Latin Hypercube Designs by Particle Swarm.” Statistics and Computing 23 (5): 663–676.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cioppa, T. M., and T. W. Lucas. 2007. “Efficient Nearly Orthogonal and Space-Filling Latin Hypercubes.” Technometrics 49 (1): 45–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crombecq, K., E. Laermans, and T. Dhaene. 2011. “Efficient Space-Filling and Non-Collapsing Sequential Design Strategies for Simulation-Based Modeling.” European Journal of Operational Research 214 (3): 683–696.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Damblin, G., M. Couplet, and B. Iooss. 2013. “Numerical Studies of Space-Filling Designs: Optimization of Latin Hypercube Samples and Subprojection Properties.” Journal of Simulation 7 (4): 276–289.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doerr, C., and D. Rainville. 2013. “Constructing Low Star Discrepancy Point Sets with Genetic Algorithms.” In Proceedings of the 15th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation, 789–796. New York, NY: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Draguljíc, D., T. J. Santner, and A. M. Dean. 2012. “Noncollapsing Space-Filling Designs for Bounded Nonrectangular Regions.” Technometrics 54 (2): 169–178.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evangelaras, H. 2016. “Enumeration and Evaluation of Small Orthogonal Latin Hypercube Designs for Polynomial Regression Models.” Quality & Reliability Engineering 32 (7): 2381–2389.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eves, J., V. V. Toropov, H. M. Thompson, N. Kapur, J. Fan, D. Copley, and A. Mincher. 2012. “Design Optimization of Supersonic Jet Pumps Using High Fidelity Flow Analysis.” Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization 45 (5): 739–745.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feng, Z. W., Q. B. Zhang, Q. F. Zhang, Q. Tang, T. Yang, and Y. Ma. 2015. “A Multiobjective Optimization Based Framework to Balance the Global Exploration and Local Exploitation in Expensive Optimization.” Journal of Global Optimization 61: 677–694.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garud, S. S., I. A. Karimi, and M. Kraft. 2017. “Design of Computer Experiments: A Review.” Computers & Chemical Engineering 106 (2): 71–95.
   Google Scholar
• Gong, W., Q. Y. Duan, J. D. Li, C. Wang, Z. H. Di, A. Z. Ye, C. Y. Miao, and Y. J. Dai. 2016. “An Intercomparison of Sampling Methods for Uncertainty Quantification of Environmental Dynamic Models.” Journal of Environmental Informatics 28 (1): 11–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grosso, A., A. R. M. J. U. Jamali, and M. Locatelli. 2009. “Finding Maximin Latin Hypercube Designs by Iterated Local Search Heuristics.” European Journal of Operational Research 197 (2): 541–547.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GuiBan, K. L., A. Rimmel, M. A. Weisser, and J. Tomasik. 2017. “The First Approximation Algorithm for the Maximin Latin Hypercube Design Problem.” Operations Research 66 (1): 1–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Han, Z. H., Y. Zhang, C. X. Song, and K. S. Zhang. 2017. “Weighted Gradient-Enhanced Kriging for High-Dimensional Surrogate Modeling and Design Optimization.” AIAA Journal 55 (12): 4330–4346.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Husslage, B. G. M., G. Rennen, E. R. V. Dam, and D. D. Hertog. 2011. “Space-Filling Latin Hypercube Designs for Computer Experiments.” Optimization and Engineering 12 (4): 611–630.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iooss, B., L. Boussouf, V. Feuillard, and A. Marrel. 2010. “Numerical Studies of the Metamodel Fitting and Validation Processes.” International Journal on Advances in Systems and Measurements 3 (2): 11–21.
   Google Scholar
• Janssen, H. 2013. “Monte-Carlo Based Uncertainty Analysis: Sampling Efficiency and Sampling Convergence.” Reliability Engineering and System Safety 109 (2): 123–132.
   Google Scholar
• Jin, R., W. Chen, and A. Sudjianto. 2005. “An Efficient Algorithm for Constructing Optimal Design of Computer Experiments.” Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 134 (1): 268–287.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joseph, V. R., and Y. Hung. 2008. “Orthogonal-Maximin Latin Hypercube Designs.” Statistica Sinica 18 (1): 171–186.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kianifar, M. R., F. Campean, and A. Wood. 2016. “Application of Permutation Genetic Algorithm for Sequential Model Building-Model Validation Design of Experiments.” Soft Computing 20 (8): 3023–3044.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kleijnen, J. P. C. 2009. “Kriging Metamodeling in Simulation: A Review.” European Journal of Operational Research 192 (3): 707–716.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larranaga, P., and C. M. H. Kuijpers. 1999. “Genetic Algorithms for the Travelling Salesman Problem: A Review of Representations and Operators.” Artificial Intelligence Review 13 (2): 129–170.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, W., L. L. Lu, X. T. Xie, and M. Yang. 2017. “A Novel Extension Algorithm for Optimized Latin Hypercube Sampling.” Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation 87 (13): 2549–2559.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, E. Y., H. Wang, and F. Ye. 2016. “Two-Level Multi-surrogate Assisted Optimization Method for High Dimensional Nonlinear Problems.” Applied Soft Computing 46: 26–36.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liefvendahl, M., and R. Stocki. 2006. “A Study on Algorithms for Optimization of Latin Hypercubes.” Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 136 (9): 3231–3247.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKay, M. D., R. J. Beckman, and W. J. Conover. 1979. “A Comparison of Three Methods for Selecting Values of Input Variables in the Analysis of Output from a Computer Code.” Technometrics 42 (1): 55–61.
   Google Scholar
• Morris, M. D., and T. J. Mitchell. 1995. “Exploratory Designs for Computer Experiments.” Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 43 (3): 381–402.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Owen, A. B. 1992. “Orthogonal Arrays for Computer Experiments, Integration and Visualization.” Statistica Sinica 2 (2): 439–452.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pholdee, N., and S. Bureerat. 2015. “An Efficient Optimum Latin Hypercube Sampling Technique Based on Sequencing Optimisation Using Simulated Annealing.” International Journal of Systems Science 46 (10): 1780–1789.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rainville, D., C. Gagné, O. Teytaud, and D. Laurendeau. 2012. “Evolutionary Optimization of Low-Discrepancy Sequences.” ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation 22 (2): 1–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rimmel, A., and F. Teytaud. 2014. “A Survey of Meta-heuristics Used for Computing Maximin Latin Hypercube.” European Conference on Evolutionary Computation in Combinatorial Optimization 2014; 25–36.
   Google Scholar
• Sheikholeslami, R., and S. Razavi. 2017. “Progressive Latin Hypercube Sampling: An Efficient Approach for Robust Sampling-Based Analysis of Environmental Models.” Environmental Modelling & Software 93: 109–126.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sudret, B., and C. V. Mai. 2015. “Computing Derivative-Based Global Sensitivity Measures Using Polynomial Chaos Expansions.” Reliability Engineering and System Safety 134: 241–250.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tang, B. X. 1993. “Orthogonal Array-Based Latin Hypercubes.” Journal of American Statistical Association 88 (424): 1392–1397.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, Z., D. Wang, N. P. Okolo, Z. Jiang, and W. Zhang. 2016. “Unified Estimate of Gaussian Kernel Width for Surrogate Models.” Neurocomputing 203: 41–51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, Z., D. Wang, N. P. Okolo, K. Zhao, and W. Zhang. 2017. “Efficient Space-Filling and Near-Orthogonality Sequential Latin Hypercube for Computer Experiments.” Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 324 (1): 348–365.
   Google Scholar
• Ye, K. Q., W. Li, and A. Sudjianto. 2000. “Algorithmic Construction of Optimal Symmetric Latin Hypercube Designs.” Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 90 (1): 145–159.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou, Y. D., and J. H. Ning. 2008. “Lower Bounds of the Wrap-Around L2-Discrepancy and Relationships Between MLHD and Uniform Design with a Large Size.” Journal of Statistical and Interference 138: 2330–2339.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu, H., L. Liu, T. Long, and L. Peng. 2012. “A Novel Algorithm of Maximin Latin Hypercube Design Using Successive Local Enumeration.” Engineering Optimization 44 (5): 551–564.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar