A simple universal algorithm for high-dimensional integration

David Krieg; Takashi Goda

REVIEW 1 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

A simple universal algorithm for high-dimensional integration

T0 review · 1 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper proves that one parameter-free randomized lattice rule—random prime, random generating vector, median—achieves near-optimal worst-case error in all weighted Korobov classes simultaneously.

desk verdict A clean, honest universal lattice rule with near-optimal rates in all weighted Korobov classes; the main theorem holds up, with Proposition 7 as the one spot a referee should press on. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.19164 v1 pith:Q5WL2ODY submitted 2024-11-28 math.NA cs.CCcs.NA

Takashi Goda , David Krieg This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.NAcs.CCcs.NA MSC 65D3041A2541A6346E3565C05

keywords high-dimensionalintegrationlatticerulesrandomizedalgorithmsmediantrickweightedKorobovspacestractabilityoptimalerrorratesuniversalquadrature

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper proves that a single parameter-free algorithm, Algorithm 1, achieves near-optimal error rates for high-dimensional integration across an entire family of smoothness classes simultaneously. The algorithm chooses, for each of $N=\mathcal{O}(h(n)\log n)$ repetitions, a random prime $p$ between $n/2$ and $n$, a random lattice vector $z\in\{1,\dots,p-1\}^d$, evaluates the rank-1 lattice rule $Q_p^z$, and returns the median of the estimates. For every weighted Korobov space with smoothness $\alpha>1/2$, the randomized worst-case error is $O(n^{-\alpha-1/2+\varepsilon})$ and the deterministic worst-case error is $O(n^{-\alpha+\varepsilon})$ with high probability. The constants are independent of dimension whenever the product weights satisfy $\gamma\in\ell^{1/\alpha}$, so the same default implementation also provides tractable error bounds.

What carries the argument

The key mechanism is the combination of three existing ideas into a parameter-free estimator. First, randomizing the prime $p$ in $(n/2,n]$ introduces a 'random $n$' effect that supplies the extra $n^{-1/2}$ in expectation; this is codified in Proposition 7, an adaptation of the known bound $\mathbb{E}|I(f)-Q_p^z(f)| \le C_{\lambda,\delta,\tau} V_d(\alpha/\lambda,\gamma^{1/\lambda})^\lambda n^{-\lambda-1/2+\delta}\|f\|$. Second, Lemma 4, built on the theory of good lattice rules, guarantees that at least a $\tau$-fraction of all generating vectors are near-optimal, so uniform random selection succeeds with probability $>1/2$. Third, the median trick (Lemma 6) amplifies that constant success probability to $1-n^{-h(n)}$ without changing the rate.

What would settle it

Take a one-dimensional Korobov function with Fourier coefficients decaying like $|h|^{-\alpha}$, run Algorithm 1 for increasing $n$ with $h(n)=\log\log n$, and measure the expected error. If the empirical rate is $n^{-\alpha}$ rather than $n^{-\alpha-1/2}$ for all $n$ above the threshold $n\ge 64V_d(\alpha/\lambda,\gamma^{1/\lambda})$, then the random-$n$ effect is not delivering the promised half-power.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that optimal error rates do not require a tailored construction of the quadrature rule. With only the number of points $n$ as input, Algorithm 1 selects a prime $p$ uniformly from the primes in $(n/2,n]$, selects $z$ uniformly from all possible generating vectors, computes the lattice rule average, repeats this $N=2\lceil h(n)\log_2 n\rceil+1$ times, and forms the median. Theorem 1 establishes that, for every $\alpha>1/2$ and every weight sequence $\gamma\in(0,1]^{\mathbb{N}}$, this one algorithm attains randomized worst-case error $\le C n^{-\alpha-1/2+\varepsilon}$ and deterministic worst-case error $\le C n^{-\alpha+\varepsilon}$ with probability at least $1-n^{-h(n)}$. When $\gamma\in\ell^{1/\alpha}$, both constants $n_0$ and $C$ are independent of $d$, and the algorithm automatically adapts to the unknown smoothness and weights.

Load-bearing premise

The randomized rate $n^{-\alpha-1/2}$ depends on Proposition 7's claim that choosing the prime randomly near $n$ improves the expected error by the extra factor $n^{-1/2}$. If that random-$n$ effect fails for general weights, or for the $\tau>1/2$ case needed by the median trick, the optimal randomized exponent in Theorem 1(i) would no longer follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

A single default implementation, with no user-supplied smoothness or weights, can serve as a universal high-dimensional integrator; choosing $n$ and a slowly growing $h(n)$ is sufficient.
When product weights satisfy $\gamma\in\ell^{1/\alpha}$, the dimension-independent constants make the algorithm provably tractable, so no curse of dimensionality is introduced.
Because the deterministic error bound holds with probability at least $1-n^{-h(n)}$, fixing a random seed yields a deterministic rule with the same near-optimal rate.
The tent-transformation variant extends the results to non-periodic smooth integrands, giving a practical default for typical black-box functions.
Numerical tests with products of univariate functions and a family of variable smoothness converge with rates matching or exceeding the predicted $n^{-\alpha-1/2}$, without any parameter tuning.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Editorial inference: the same median-of-random-lattice template could be applied to other reproducing-kernel Hilbert spaces whose error is controlled by a tail of Fourier coefficients, as long as a proportion of node sets is near-optimal.
Editorial inference: choosing a slower-growing $h(n)$ such as $\log\log n$ keeps the cost low but only gives polylogarithmic failure probability; applications requiring high confidence should increase $h(n)$, at a multiplicative cost $O(h(n))$.
Editorial inference: the extra $n^{-1/2}$ from random $n$ suggests that a fully derandomized algorithm cannot match the randomized exponent unless it also randomizes the number of points; this may be an inherent barrier.
Editorial inference: combining Algorithm 1 with importance sampling or control variates could preserve universality while reducing variance, but remains untested.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Dear [Colleague],

The thing to know: this paper delivers exactly what it says, and it is more honest than most. It proposes a universal randomized lattice rule—random prime, random generating vector, median over repetitions—and proves near-optimal worst-case error bounds simultaneously for all weighted Korobov classes with α>1/2 and general weights. The randomized rate is n^{-α-1/2+ε}, deterministic is n^{-α+ε} with probability 1-n^{-h(n)}. The ingredients are all known, and the paper says so plainly; the new part is the clean combination and the fact that the algorithm needs no knowledge of α or γ.

What I liked: Lemma 4 is proved in full, and the adaptation of Proposition 7 from [16] to general weights and τ>1/2 is plausible and carefully sketched. The median trick application is neat, and the dimension independence under γ∈ℓ^{1/α} is carried through. The numerical experiments are honest and support the rates; they even show the algorithm automatically exploiting smoothness. The paper is refreshingly free of overclaiming—except the abstract says 'optimal' where the theorems give near-optimal with ε and logs, which is a minor wording issue.

Where the soft spots are, in proportion: the largest is Proposition 7. The n^{-1/2} gain in the randomized rate is not a consequence of the pointwise deterministic bound; it needs the second-moment/cancellation argument from [16] to survive when z is drawn uniformly from a large subset Z_{p,τ}, and for general weights. The proof here is a sketch ('we can indeed argue as in [16]'). I checked the mechanism, and it looks sound—the size condition does the job—but a referee should ask for a full proof or a reference that already covers this exact case. It is not a fatal flaw, just the least secure link. Also, Remark 2 about the tent transformation for non-periodic functions is stated without analysis; that's a minor gap. And the algorithm's cost is n log n h(n) function values, not n, so the rates are in terms of n with a log factor in cost—worth stating explicitly.

The citation pattern is fine: the key ingredients are credited to the right papers, and the self-citations are not load-bearing. This is a solid contribution that deserves a serious referee. Compared to the reader's take, I agree with ACCEPT; I'd just add that the abstract's 'optimal' should be softened and Proposition 7 deserves a fuller treatment.

Recommendation: send to peer review. It'll be a useful paper for anyone doing high-dimensional integration in practice, and the theory is worth checking carefully once.

Referee Report

1 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a randomized lattice-rule algorithm for high-dimensional integration. For an integer n, the algorithm draws N ≈ h(n) log n independent trials; in each trial it selects a prime p uniformly from the primes in (n/2, n] and a generating vector z uniformly from {1, ..., p-1}^d, then computes the rank-1 lattice rule Q_z^p(f). The final estimate is the componentwise median of the N values. The main results, Theorem 1 and its detailed versions Theorems 9 and 10, state that for the weighted Korobov class H_{d,α,γ} with smoothness α > 1/2 and weights 0 < γ_u ≤ 1, the randomized worst-case error is O(n^{-α-1/2+ε}) and, with probability at least 1 - n^{-h(n)}, the deterministic worst-case error is O(n^{-α+ε}); the constants are independent of the dimension when the weights are product weights with γ ∈ ℓ^{1/α}. The algorithm is parameter-free, requiring no component-by-component construction. The proof combines a large-set result for good generating vectors (Lemma 4), a randomized-prime result adapted from Kritzer et al. (Proposition 7), and the median trick (Lemma 6). Numerical experiments for periodic and non-periodic test functions are reported.

Significance. If Proposition 7 is made fully explicit, this is a significant contribution: it gives a genuinely simple, universal algorithm that automatically adapts to the smoothness and weights of a broad family of Korobov spaces, with near-optimal rates and dimension-independent constants under a natural summability condition. The combination of random primes, random generating vectors, and the median-of-means trick is novel in this context and avoids expensive CBC constructions. The proof of Lemma 4 is self-contained and correct modulo a typo, and the deterministic guarantee in Theorem 10 is also of independent interest. The numerical experiments, including the tent-transformed non-periodic variant, support the theoretical rates. The main weakness is that the proof of the load-bearing Proposition 7 is only a sketch referring to an external theorem.

major comments (1)

[Section 2, Proposition 7] Proposition 7 is the only source of the extra n^{-1/2} improvement in the randomized rate of Theorem 1(i), yet its proof is not actually given. The text states that after replacing Z_p with Z_{p,τ} and B_n with B'_n, 'we can indeed argue as in [16]', but the second-moment/cancellation argument that produces the n^{-1/2} factor is not reproduced, nor is it demonstrated that the size condition |Z_{p,τ}| ≥ τ(p-1)^d suffices for a generic subset Z_{p,τ} (rather than the specific set used in [16]) and for general weights γ_u ≤ 1. Because Theorem 9 and Theorem 1(i) inherit their exact randomized exponent from this proposition, this is a load-bearing gap. The authors should provide a complete proof or a detailed outline, e.g. in an appendix, verifying the double-sum estimates, the role of the condition n ≥ 4 V_d(α/λ, γ^{1/λ})/(1-τ), and the dependence of the constant on λ, δ, and τ.

minor comments (4)

[Section 2, proof of Lemma 4] In the displayed equation after the indicator bound, the term p|u|α/λ should read p^{-|u|α/λ}. As printed, the subsequent inequality to 2/(p-1) V_d(α/λ,γ^{1/λ}) does not follow; the intended computation uses p^{-|u|α/λ} ≤ 1/(p-1). This is a typo, but it should be corrected to avoid confusion.
[Section 4, test function f1] The function f1(x) = prod_{j=1}^d (1 + |4x_j-2|^{-1}/j^{c_1}) has a non-integrable singularity at x_j = 1/2 for d = 1. Please clarify whether this is indeed the intended test function and justify the statement that hat f1(h) = O(|h|^{-2}) and that f1 belongs to the weighted Korobov space H_{d,3/2-ε,γ}. If the function is not in the space, the numerical validation would be more convincing with a different singular test function with an integrable singularity.
[Section 3, proof of Theorem 10] In the sentence beginning 'Thus, if we choose a random prime pk ...', the phrase 'for all 1 ≤ j ≤ k' should read 'for all 1 ≤ k ≤ N'.
[Section 1, Remark 5] The notation γ^{1/λ} is used without an explicit definition in the context of general weights. For product weights it clearly means componentwise powers, but for general weights (γ_u) the meaning should be defined at first use, e.g. (γ_u)^{1/λ} applied componentwise over u.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: central bounds follow from external results and an in-text proof; self-citations are not load-bearing.

full rationale

The central randomized-rate claim, Theorem 1(i)/Theorem 9, rests on Proposition 7, which is explicitly credited to the external paper [16] (Kritzer, Kuo, Nuyens, and Ullrich) and is not a self-citation. Lemma 4, the existence of a large set of good generating vectors, is proved in the text from a Markov argument over the full set of generating vectors together with an elementary congruence-counting bound from [16, Lemma 4]; no fitted parameters are involved. Corollary 8 converts the conditional guarantee to the uniform distribution over all generating vectors using the size condition |Z_{p,tau}| >= tau (p-1)^d, which is an inequality argument rather than a redefinition of the target error. The median trick, Lemma 6, is cited to the external reference [17]. Theorem 10 is stated with a pointer to [12], but the proof is actually written out in full in the text; the pointer to the authors' earlier work is therefore not load-bearing. The algorithm is parameter-free in the sense that no parameter is fitted to data and then renamed a prediction; the numerical experiments are illustrative and do not enter the proofs. The only soft spot is that Proposition 7's adaptation to general weights and to tau > 1/2 is sketched rather than fully expanded, but an incompletely written proof of an external result is a completeness or correctness concern, not circularity. No step in the derivation chain reduces, by definition or by self-citation, to the quantities it is supposed to predict.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The analysis is built on the weighted Korobov model (definition), the standard lattice-rule error identity, a counting bound for congruent lattice points, the median trick lemma, an external randomized error proposition from [16], and the ℓ^{1/α} summability condition for dimension-independent constants. There are no fitted free parameters, and no new entities are introduced.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption The integrand lies in a weighted Korobov space H_{d,α,γ} with α>1/2 and 0<γ_u≤1.
The error bounds are worst-case over the unit ball of this reproducing kernel Hilbert space; this is the model class defined in Section 1.
standard math The lattice rule squared worst-case error equals Σ_{h·z≡0 mod p} r_{d,α,γ}(h)^{-2}.
Character property of lattice points, [6, Theorem 2.19]; used at the start of Lemma 4.
standard math For a uniformly random z, the probability that h·z≡0 mod p is ≤1/(p-1) unless p divides every component of h.
Counting solutions of a linear congruence in (Z/pZ)^d; cited to [16, Lemma 4] in the proof of Lemma 4.
standard math Median trick: for N odd and P(X_i∉I)≤τ<1/2, P(median∉I)≤(1/2)(4τ(1-τ))^{N/2}.
Lemma 6, cited to [17, Proposition 2.2]; underpins Theorems 9 and 10.
domain assumption Proposition 7 (adapted from [16, Theorem 9]): random prime p together with a good generating vector yields expected error O(n^{-λ-1/2+δ}).
This external theorem supplies the n^{-1/2} randomized-rate improvement; the paper only sketches the adaptation, making it a load-bearing background result.
domain assumption For product weights with γ∈ℓ^{1/α}, the quantity V_d(α/λ,γ^{1/λ}) is bounded independently of d.
Remark 5 shows V_d ≤ exp(2ζ(α/λ)(Σ γ_j^{1/α})^{α/λ}); this is the tractability condition that makes n_0 and C dimension-independent.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A simple universal algorithm for high-dimensional integration." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/Q5WL2ODY

@misc{pith2026241119164,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A simple universal algorithm for high-dimensional integration},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/Q5WL2ODY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.19164}
}

read the original abstract

We present a simple universal algorithm for high-dimensional integration which has the optimal error rate (independent of the dimension) in all weighted Korobov classes both in the randomized and the deterministic setting. Our theoretical findings are complemented by numerical tests.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.19164 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Results for the test functions f1 and f2 with d = 20. following parameterized family of functions: fa,c(x) = Y d j=1 1 + ga(xj ) − R 1 0 ga(t) dt j c ! , for a > 0 and c > a + 1, where ga(x) = [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_1.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Results for the test function fa,c with d = 50 and c = 2a+1. Each subfigure corresponds to a different value of a. the error remains above 10−13. The estimated empirical rates are indicated in each subfigure. As observed, for all the cases we considered, our algorithm achieves the theoretically optimal (or even better) error rates, automatically exploiting the smoothness of the integrands. This observation supports… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Results for the nonperiodic test function with d = 10. Lastly, we also consider a non-periodic test function: f(x) = Y d j=1 1 + θ j 8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

Error estimation for quasi-Monte Carlo
math.NA 2024-12 accept novelty 2.0 of 10

A review of uncertainty quantification for quasi-Monte Carlo that recommends Student's t intervals from at least 10 randomized replicates and identifies near-symmetry of RQMC errors as a promising but unproven basis f...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

28 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[16]

Kritzer, F

P. Kritzer, F. Y. Kuo, D. Nuyens, and M. Ullrich, Lattice rules with random n achieve nearly the optimal O(n−α−1/2) error independently of the dimension , J. Approx. Theory 240 (2019), 96–113

work page 2019
[1]

N. S. Bahvalov, Estimates in the mean of the remainder term of quadratic formulas, ˇZ. Vyˇ cisl. Mat i Mat. Fiz.1 (1961), 64–77 (Russian)

work page 1961
[2]

L. Chen, M. Xu, and H. Zhang, A random integration algorithm for high- dimensional function spaces , arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.16627 (2024), 23 pp. A SIMPLE UNIVERSAL ALGORITHM FOR INTEGRATION 17

work page arXiv 2024
[3]

Dick and T

J. Dick and T. Goda, Stability of lattice rules and polynomial lattice rules con- structed by the component-by-component algorithm , J. Comput. Appl. Math. 382 (2021), Paper No. 113062, 16 pp

work page 2021
[4]

J. Dick, T. Goda, and K. Suzuki, Component-by-component construction of randomized rank-1 lattice rules achieving almost the optimal randomized error rate, Math. Comp. 91 (2022), no. 338, 2771–2801

work page 2022
[5]

J. Dick, P. Kritzer, G. Leobacher, and F. Pillichshammer, A reduced fast component-by-component construction of lattice points for integration in weighted spaces with fast decreasing weights , J. Comput. Appl. Math. 276 (2015), 1–15

work page 2015
[6]

J. Dick, P. Kritzer, and F. Pillichshammer, Lattice rules—numerical integra- tion, approximation, and discrepancy , Springer Series in Computational Math- ematics, vol. 58, Springer, Cham, 2022

work page 2022
[7]

J. Dick, D. Nuyens, and F. Pillichshammer, Lattice rules for nonperiodic smooth integrands, Numer. Math. 126 (2014), no. 2, 259–291

work page 2014

Show all 28 references

[8]

J. Dick, I. H. Sloan, X. Wang, and H. Wo´ zniakowski, Good lattice rules in weighted Korobov spaces with general weights, Numer. Math. 103 (2006), no. 1, 63–97

2006
[9]

Ebert, P

A. Ebert, P. Kritzer, D. Nuyens, and O. Osisiogu, Digit-by-digit and component- by-component constructions of lattice rules for periodic functions with unknown smoothness, J. Complexity 66 (2021), Paper No. 101555, 37 pp

2021
[10]

Gnewuch, J

M. Gnewuch, J. Dick, L. Markhasin, and W. Sickel, QMC integration based on arbitrary (t, m, s)-nets yields optimal convergence rates on several scales of function spaces, arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.12879 (2024), 56 pp

2024
[11]

Goda, A randomized lattice rule without component-by-component construc- tion, arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.02660 (2024), 21 pp

T. Goda, A randomized lattice rule without component-by-component construc- tion, arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.02660 (2024), 21 pp

2024 arXiv
[12]

Goda and P

T. Goda and P. L’Ecuyer, Construction-free median quasi–Monte Carlo rules for function spaces with unspecified smoothness and general weights , SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 44 (2022), no. 4, A2765–A2788

2022
[13]

T. Goda, K. Suzuki, and M. Matsumoto, A universal median quasi–Monte Carlo integration, SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 62 (2024), no. 1, 533–566

2024
[14]

Hofstadler and D

J. Hofstadler and D. Rudolf, Consistency of randomized integration methods , J. Complexity 76 (2023), Paper No. 101740, 10 pp

2023
[15]

Krieg and E

D. Krieg and E. Novak, A universal algorithm for multivariate integration , Found. Comput. Math. 17 (2017), no. 4, 895–916

2017
[17]

R. J. Kunsch, E. Novak, and D. Rudolf, Solvable integration problems and optimal sample size selection , J. Complexity 53 (2019), 40–67

2019
[18]

R. J. Kunsch and D. Rudolf, Optimal confidence for Monte Carlo integration of smooth functions , Adv. Comput. Math. 45 (2019), no. 5-6, 3095–3122

2019
[19]

F. Y. Kuo, Component-by-component constructions achieve the optimal rate of convergence for multivariate integration in weighted Korobov and Sobolev spaces, J. Complexity 19 (2003), no. 3, 301–320

2003
[20]

F. Y. Kuo, D. Nuyens, and L. Wilkes, Random-prime-fixed-vector randomised lattice-based algorithm for high-dimensional integration , J. Complexity 79 (2023), Paper No. 101785, 28 pp

2023
[21]

F. Y. Kuo, I. H. Sloan, and H. Wo´ zniakowski, Periodization strategy may fail in high dimensions , Numer. Algorithms 46 (2007), no. 4, 369–391. 18 A SIMPLE UNIVERSAL ALGORITHM FOR INTEGRATION

2007
[22]

V. K. Nguyen, M. Ullrich, and T. Ullrich, Change of variable in spaces of mixed smoothness and numerical integration of multivariate functions on the unit cube, Constr. Approx. 46 (2017), no. 1, 69–108

2017
[23]

Nuyens and R

D. Nuyens and R. Cools, Fast algorithms for component-by-component con- struction of rank-1 lattice rules in shift-invariant reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces, Math. Comp. 75 (2006), no. 254, 903–920

2006
[24]

Pan, Automatic optimal-rate convergence of randomized nets using median- of-means, arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.01397 (2024), 34 pp

Z. Pan, Automatic optimal-rate convergence of randomized nets using median- of-means, arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.01397 (2024), 34 pp

2024 arXiv
[25]

Pan and A

Z. Pan and A. B. Owen, Super-polynomial accuracy of one dimensional ran- domized nets using the median of means , Math. Comp. 92 (2023), no. 340, 805–837

2023
[26]

, Super-polynomial accuracy of multidimensional randomized nets using the median-of-means, Math. Comp. 93 (2024), no. 349, 2265–2289

2024
[27]

I. H. Sloan and A. V. Reztsov, Component-by-component construction of good lattice rules, Math. Comp. 71 (2002), no. 237, 263–273

2002
[28]

Ullrich, A Monte Carlo method for integration of multivariate smooth func- tions, SIAM J

M. Ullrich, A Monte Carlo method for integration of multivariate smooth func- tions, SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 55 (2017), no. 3, 1188–1200

2017

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [16]

Kritzer, F

P. Kritzer, F. Y. Kuo, D. Nuyens, and M. Ullrich, Lattice rules with random n achieve nearly the optimal O(n−α−1/2) error independently of the dimension , J. Approx. Theory 240 (2019), 96–113

work page 2019

[2] [1]

N. S. Bahvalov, Estimates in the mean of the remainder term of quadratic formulas, ˇZ. Vyˇ cisl. Mat i Mat. Fiz.1 (1961), 64–77 (Russian)

work page 1961

[3] [2]

L. Chen, M. Xu, and H. Zhang, A random integration algorithm for high- dimensional function spaces , arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.16627 (2024), 23 pp. A SIMPLE UNIVERSAL ALGORITHM FOR INTEGRATION 17

work page arXiv 2024

[4] [3]

Dick and T

J. Dick and T. Goda, Stability of lattice rules and polynomial lattice rules con- structed by the component-by-component algorithm , J. Comput. Appl. Math. 382 (2021), Paper No. 113062, 16 pp

work page 2021

[5] [4]

J. Dick, T. Goda, and K. Suzuki, Component-by-component construction of randomized rank-1 lattice rules achieving almost the optimal randomized error rate, Math. Comp. 91 (2022), no. 338, 2771–2801

work page 2022

[6] [5]

J. Dick, P. Kritzer, G. Leobacher, and F. Pillichshammer, A reduced fast component-by-component construction of lattice points for integration in weighted spaces with fast decreasing weights , J. Comput. Appl. Math. 276 (2015), 1–15

work page 2015

[7] [6]

J. Dick, P. Kritzer, and F. Pillichshammer, Lattice rules—numerical integra- tion, approximation, and discrepancy , Springer Series in Computational Math- ematics, vol. 58, Springer, Cham, 2022

work page 2022

[8] [7]

J. Dick, D. Nuyens, and F. Pillichshammer, Lattice rules for nonperiodic smooth integrands, Numer. Math. 126 (2014), no. 2, 259–291

work page 2014