Fully sequential procedures for comparing constrained systems via simulation

Naval Research Logistics

Volumn 57, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 403-421

  Andradóttir, Sigrún ^a   Kim, Seong Hee ^a  

^a Georgia Institute of Technology   (United States)

Author keywords

Constraints; Fully sequential procedures; Multiple performance measures; Ranking and selection

Indexed keywords

CONSTRAINED SYSTEMS; FINITE NUMBER; IDENTIFICATION AND REMOVAL; INDIFFERENCE ZONE; NUMERICAL STUDIES; PERFORMANCE MEASURE; PHASE I; PHASE II; RANKING AND SELECTION; SEQUENTIAL PROCEDURES; SIMULATED SYSTEM; STOCHASTIC CONSTRAINTS; THEORETICAL RESULT;

EID: 77955465845     PISSN: 0894069X     EISSN: 15206750     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/nav.20408     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. S. Andradóttir, D. Goldsman, and S.-H. Kim, "Finding the best in the presence of a stochastic constraint," Proceedings of the 2005 Winter Simulation Conference, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Piscataway, M.E. Kuhl, N.M. Steiger, F.B. Armstrong, and J.A. Joines (Editors), NJ, 2005, pp. 732-738.
2. D. Batur and S.-H. Kim, Fully sequential selection procedures with parabolic boundary, IIE Trans 38 (2006), 749-764.
3. R.E. Bechhofer, A single-sample multiple decision procedure for ranking means of normal populations with known variances, Ann Math Stat 25 (1954), 16-39.
4. J. Boesel, B.L. Nelson, and S.-H. Kim, Using ranking and selection to "clean up" after simulation optimization, Oper Res 51 (2003), 814-825.
5. J. Butler, D.J. Morrice, and P.W. Mullarkey, A multiple attribute utility theory approach to ranking and selection, Manage Sci 47 (2001), 800-816.
6. C.H. Chen,Alower bound for the correct-selection probability and its application to discrete event simulations, IEEE Trans Automatic Control 41 (1996), 1227-1231.
7. H. C. Chen, C.H. Chen, and E. Yücesan, Computing efforts allocation for ordinal optimization and discrete event simulation, IEEE Trans Automatic Control 45 (2000), 960-964.
8. S.E Chick, "Selecting the best system: A decision-theoretic approach," Proceedings of the 1997 Winter Simulation Conference, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Piscataway, S. Andradóttir, K.J. Healy, D.H. Withers, and B.L. Nelson (Editors), NJ, 1997, pp. 326-333.
9. S.E. Chick and K. Inoue, New two-stage and sequential procedures for selecting the best simulated system, Oper Res 49 (2001), 732-743. (Pubitemid 34011324)
10. S.E. Chick and K. Inoue, New procedures for identifying the best simulated system using common random numbers, Manage Sci 47 (2001), 1133-1149.
11. V. Fabian, Note on Anderson's sequential procedures with triangular boundary, Ann Stat 2 (1974), 170-176.
12. D. Goldsman, S.-H. Kim, W. Marshall, and B.L. Nelson, Ranking and selection procedures for steady-state simulation: Perspectives and procedures, INFORMS J Comput 14 (2002), 2-19.
13. M. Hartmann, An improvement on Paulson's sequential ranking procedure, Sequent Anal 7 (1988), 363-372.
14. M. Hartmann, An improvement on Paulson's procedure for selecting the population with the largest mean from k normal populations with a common unknown variance, Sequent Anal 10 (1991), 1-16.
15. L.J. Hong and B.L. Nelson, The tradeoff between sampling and switching: New sequential procedures for indifference-zone selection, IIE Trans 37 (2005), 623-634.
16. C. Jennison, I.M. Johnstone, and B.W. Turnbull, Asymptotically optimal procedures for sequential adaptive selection of the best of several normal means. Technical Report: No.463 School of Operations Research and Industrial Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 1980.
17. S.-H. Kim, Comparison with a standard via fully sequential procedures, ACM Trans Model Comput Simul 15 (2005), 1-20.
18. S.-H. Kim and B.L. Nelson, A fully sequential procedure for indifference-zone selection in simulation, ACM Trans Model Comput Simul 11 (2001), 251-273.
19. S.-H. Kim and B.L. Nelson, On the asymptotic validity of fully sequential selection procedures for steady-state simulation, Oper Res 54 (2006), 475-488.
20. S.-H. Kim and B.L. Nelson, "Selecting the best system," Handbooks in operations research and management science: Simulation, S.G. Henderson and B.L. Nelson (Editors), Elsevier Science, Oxford, UK, 2006, Chapter 17, pp. 501-534.
21. A.M. Law and D. Kelton, Simulation modeling and analysis, 3rd edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, 2000.
22. G.J. Malone, S.-H. Kim, D. Goldsman, and D. Batur, "Performance of variance updating procedures on various data," Proceedings of the 2005 Winter Simulation Conference, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, M.E. Kuhl, N.M. Steiger, F.B. Armstrong, and J.A. Joines (Editors), Piscataway, NJ, 2005, pp. 825-832.
23. B.L. Nelson, J. Swann, D. Goldsman, and W. Song, Simple procedures for selecting the best system when the number of alternatives is large, Oper Res 49 (2001), 950-963.
24. E. Paulson, A sequential procedure for selecting the population with the largest mean from k normal populations, Ann Math Stat 35 (1964), 174-180.
25. J. Pichitlamken, B.L. Nelson, and L.J. Hong, Asequential procedure for neighborhood selection-of-the-best in optimization via simulation, Eur J Oper Res 173 (2006), 283-298.
26. Y. Rinott, On two-stage selection procedures and related probability-inequalities, Commun Stat A7 (1978), 799-811.
27. T.J. Santner and A.C. Tamhane, "Designing experiments for selecting a normal population with a large mean and a small variance," Design of Experiments - Ranking and Selection: Essays in Honor of Robert E. Bechhofer, T.J. Santer and A.C. Tamhane (Editors), Marcel-Dekker, New York, 1984, pp. 179-198.