Comparison with a standard via fully sequential procedures

ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation

Volumn 15, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 155-174

  Kim, Seong Hee ^a,b  

^a GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^b Georgia Institute of Technology   (United States)

Author keywords

Comparison with a standard; Output analysis; Ranking and selection; Simulation; Variance reduction

Indexed keywords

COMPARISON WITH A STANDARD; OUTPUT ANALYSIS; RANKING AND SELECTION; VARIANCE REDUCTION;

COMPUTER SIMULATION; PERFORMANCE; PROBLEM SOLVING;

STANDARDS;

EID: 27344438965     PISSN: 10493301     EISSN: 10493301     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1145/1060576.1060579     Document Type: Review

References (17)

1. BECHHOFER, R. AND TURNBULL, B. 1978. Two (k + 1)-decision selection procedures for comparing k normal means with a specified standard. J. Amer. Statis. Assoc. 73, 385-392.
2. BOESEL, J., NELSON, B., AND KIM, S.-H. 2003. Using ranking and selection to clean up after a simulation search. Oper. Res. 51, 814-825.
3. CHEN, H.-C., CHEN, C.-H., DAI, L., AND YÜCESAN, E. 1997. New development of optimal computing budget allocation for discrete event simulation. In Proceedings of the 1997 Winter Simulation Conference, S. Andradóttir, K. Healy, D. Withers, and B. Nelson, Eds. IEEE, Piscataway, New Jersey, 334-341.
4. CHEN, H.-C., CHEN, C.-H., AND YÜCESAN, E. 2000. Computing efforts allocation for ordinal optimization and discrete event simulation. IEEE Trans. Auto. Cont. 45, 960-964.
5. CHICK, S. 1997. Selecting the best system: A decision-theoretic approach. In Proceedings of the 1997 Winter Simulation Conference, S. Andradóttir, K. Healy, D. Withers, and B. Nelson, Eds. IEEE, Piscataway, New Jersey, 326-333.
6. CHICK, S. AND INOUE, K. 2001a. New two-stage and sequential procedures for selecting the best simulated system. Oper. Res. 49, 1609-1624.
7. CHICK, S. AND INOUE, K. 2001b. New procedures for identifying the best simulated system using common random numbers. Manage. Sci. 47, 1133-1149.
8. FABIAN, V. 1974. Note on Anderson's sequential procedures with triangular boundary. Annals Statis. 2, 170-176.
9. GOLDSMAN, D. AND NELSON, B. 1998. Comparing systems via simulation. In Handbook of simulation: Principles, Methodology, Advances, Applications, and Practice, J. Banks, Ed. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 273-306.
10. HARTMANN, M. 1991. An improvement on Paulson's procedure for selecting the population with the largest mean from k normal populations with a common unknown variance. Sequential Analysis 10, 1-16.
11. HONG, L. AND NELSON, B. 2005. The tradeoff between sampling and switching: New sequential procedures for indifference-zone selection. IIE Trans., to appear.
12. KIM, S.-H. AND NELSON, B. 2001. A fully sequential procedure for indifference-zone selection in simulation. ACM Trans. Model. Comput. Simul. 11, 251-273.
13. LAW, A. AND KELTON, D. 2000. Simulation Modeling and Analysis, 3rd ed. McGraw-Hill, New York.
14. NELSON, B. AND BARNERJEE, S. 2001. Selecting a good system: Procedures and inference. IIE Trans. 33, 149-166.
15. NELSON, B. AND GOLDSMAN, D. 2001. Comparisons with a standard in simulation experiments. Manage. Sci. 47, 449-463.
16. NELSON, B., SWANN, J., GOLDSMAN, D., AND SONG, W. 2001. Simple procedures for selecting the best simulated system when the number of alternatives is large. Oper. Res. 49, 950-963.
17. PAULSON, E. 1952. On the comparison of several experimental categories with a control. Annals Math. Statis. 23, 239-246.