Table 1.

Model parameters used in the simulation are taken predominantly from those used by Murray and Goyal (Murray & Goyal, 2015) with a slight symbolic modification for the visualization of outputs corresponding to the respective parameters with a clear distinguish-ability. As we do not have realistic ranges for all parameters, instead of varying some in realistic ranges, and others over wide ranges, we choose to vary all in wide ranges from 50 to 150%. Using a wide range for each parameter, we have a big parameter space to compare Sobol and LHS-PRCC methods.

Parameter	Symbol (in (Murray & Goyal, 2015))	Symbol (in our study)	Value ($\frac{1}{\text{day}}$)	Reference
Cell infection rate	k	k	0.3	(Cangelosi et al., 2017; Murray & Goyal, 2015)
cccDNA synthesis rate	b	bR	log(2)	(Cangelosi et al., 2017; Murray & Goyal, 2015)
Conversion rate of cccDNA to ssDNA	a	a	50	(Cangelosi et al., 2017; Murray & Goyal, 2015)
Conversion rate of ssDNA to dsDNA	b	bS	log(2)	(Cangelosi et al., 2017; Murray & Goyal, 2015)
P36 synthesis rate	aP	aP	1000 × a	(Cangelosi et al., 2017; Murray & Goyal, 2015)
[1ex] P36 exporting rate	bP	bP	log(2)	(Cangelosi et al., 2017; Murray & Goyal, 2015)
dsDNA transportation rate to the nucleus/Virions release rate	b	bD	log(2)	(Cangelosi et al., 2017; Murray & Goyal, 2015)
rcDNA degradation rate	μR	μR	log(2)	(Cangelosi et al., 2017; Murray & Goyal, 2015)
cccDNA degradation rate	μ	μ	log(2)/50	(Cangelosi et al., 2017; Murray & Goyal, 2015)
p36 influence on R and dsDNA → C, and on R to export V	λ	λ	1/100000	(Cangelosi et al., 2017; Murray & Goyal, 2015)
p36 degradation rate	c	$c_{P_E}$	24 × log(2)/4	(Cangelosi et al., 2017; Murray & Goyal, 2015)
Virions degradation rate	c	cV	24 × log(2)/4	(Cangelosi et al., 2017; Murray & Goyal, 2015)
Time delay	τ	τ	30/1440	(Cangelosi et al., 2017; Murray & Goyal, 2015)