Paper detail

On a Class of Partitions with Lower Expected Star Discrepancy and Its Upper Bound than Jittered Sampling

We investigate the expected star discrepancy under a newly designed class of convex equivolume partition models. The main contributions are two-fold. First, we establish a strong partition principle for the star discrepancy, showing that our newly designed partitions yield stratified sampling point sets with lower expected star discrepancy than both classical jittered sampling and simple random sampling. Specifically, we prove that $\mathbb{E}(D^{*}_{N}(Z))\leq\mathbb{E}(D^{*}_{N}(Y))<\mathbb{E}(D^{*}_{N}(X))$, where $X$, $Y$, and $Z$ represent simple random sampling, jittered sampling, and our new partition sampling, respectively. Second, we derive explicit upper bounds for the expected star discrepancy under our partition models, which improve upon existing bounds for jittered sampling. Our results resolve Open Question 2 posed in Kiderlen and Pausinger (2021) regarding the strong partition principle for star discrepancy.

preprint2026arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.