Quantifying uncertainties on excursion sets under a Gaussian random field prior

We focus on the problem of estimating and quantifying uncertainties on the excursion set of a function under a limited evaluation budget. We adopt a Bayesian approach where the objective function is assumed to be a realization of a Gaussian random field. In this setting, the posterior distribution on the objective function gives rise to a posterior distribution on excursion sets. Several approaches exist to summarize the distribution of such sets based on random closed set theory. While the recently proposed Vorob'ev approach exploits analytical formulae, further notions of variability require Monte Carlo estimators relying on Gaussian random field conditional simulations. In the present work we propose a method to choose Monte Carlo simulation points and obtain quasi-realizations of the conditional field at fine designs through affine predictors. The points are chosen optimally in the sense that they minimize the posterior expected distance in measure between the excursion set and its reconstruction. The proposed method reduces the computational costs due to Monte Carlo simulations and enables the computation of quasi-realizations on fine designs in large dimensions. We apply this reconstruction approach to obtain realizations of an excursion set on a fine grid which allow us to give a new measure of uncertainty based on the distance transform of the excursion set. Finally we present a safety engineering test case where the simulation method is employed to compute a Monte Carlo estimate of a contour line

Using the bootstrap to quantify the authority of an empirical ranking

The bootstrap is a popular and convenient method for quantifying the authority of an empirical ordering of attributes, for example of a ranking of the performance of institutions or of the influence of genes on a response variable. In the first of these examples, the number, $p$, of quantities being ordered is sometimes only moderate in size; in the second it can be very large, often much greater than sample size. However, we show that in both types of problem the conventional bootstrap can produce inconsistency. Moreover, the standard $n$-out-of-$n$ bootstrap estimator of the distribution of an empirical rank may not converge in the usual sense; the estimator may converge in distribution, but not in probability. Nevertheless, in many cases the bootstrap correctly identifies the support of the asymptotic distribution of ranks. In some contemporary problems, bootstrap prediction intervals for ranks are particularly long, and in this context, we also quantify the accuracy of bootstrap methods, showing that the standard bootstrap gets the order of magnitude of the interval right, but not the constant multiplier of interval length. The $m$-out-of-$n$ bootstrap can improve performance and produce statistical consistency, but it requires empirical choice of $m$; we suggest a tuning solution to this problem. We show that in genomic examples, where it might be expected that the standard, ``synchronous'' bootstrap will successfully accommodate nonindependence of vector components, that approach can produce misleading results. An ``independent component'' bootstrap can overcome these difficulties, even in cases where components are not strictly independent.Comment: Published in at http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/09-AOS699 the Annals of Statistics (http://www.imstat.org/aos/) by the Institute of Mathematical Statistics (http://www.imstat.org