DEXSim: An experimental environment for distributed execution of replicated simulators using a concept of single simulation multiple scenarios

SIMULATION

Volumn 90, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 355-376

  Choi, Changbeom ^a   Seo, Kyung Min ^a   Kim, Tag Gon ^a  

^a Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST)   (South Korea)

Author keywords

distributed simulation; experimental frame; Faster data collection; multi core computing

Indexed keywords

DATA ACQUISITION; HARDWARE; NETWORK ARCHITECTURE; SCALABILITY;

DATA COLLECTION; DISTRIBUTED SIMULATIONS; EXPERIMENTAL ENVIRONMENT; EXPERIMENTAL FRAME; LAYERED ARCHITECTURE; MULTI-CORE COMPUTING; SIMULATION FRAMEWORK; SIMULATION PERFORMANCE;

COMPUTER SIMULATION;

EID: 84899121804     PISSN: 00375497     EISSN: 17413133     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0037549713520251     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Rubinstein R.Y. Melaned B. Modern simulation and modeling. New York, NY, USA: Wiley, 1998.
2. Piplani L.K. Mercer J.G. Roop R.O. System acquisition manager’s guide for the use of models and simulation. Fort Belvoir, VA, USA: Defense Systems Management College Press, 1994.
3. Kim J.H. Choi C.B. Kim T.G. Battle experiments of naval air defense with discrete event system-based mission-level modeling and simulations. J Defens Model Simulat 2011; 8: 173-187.
4. Kim J.H. Moon I.C. Kim T.G. New insight into doctrine via simulation interoperation of heterogeneous levels of models in battle experimentation. Simulation 2012; 88: 649-667.
5. Seo K.M. et al. Measurement of effectiveness for an anti-torpedo combat system using a discrete event systems specification-based underwater warfare simulator. J Defens Model Simulat 2011; 8: 157-171.
6. Higgins T.M. Turriff A.E. Patrone D.M. Simulation-based undersea warfare assessment. Johns Hopkins Tech Digest 2002; 23: 396-402.
7. Fowler J.W. Rose O. Grand challenges in modeling and simulation of complex manufacturing systems. Simulation 2004; 80: 469-476.
8. Yang F. Ankenman B. Lelson B.L. Efficient generation of cycle time-throughput curves through simulation based and metamodeling. Nav Res Logist 2007; 54: 78-93.
9. McGeoch C. Analyzing algorithms by simulation: variance reduction techniques and simulation speedups. ACM Comput Surv 1992; 24: 195-212.
10. Gepner P. Kowalik M.F. Multi-core processors: new way to achieve high system performance. In: proceedings of the PAR ELEC 2006, international symposium, 2006.
11. Rybacki S. Himmelspach J. Uhrmacher A.M. Experiments with single core, multi-core, and GPU based computation of cellular automata. In: proceedings of the advances in system simulation, 2009.
12. Liu Q. Wainer G. Multicore acceleration of discrete event system specification systems. Simulation 2012; 88: 801-831.
13. Kutanoglu E. Sabuncuoglu I. Experimental investigation of iterative simulation-based scheduling in a dynamic and stochastic job shop. J Manuf Syst 2001; 20: 264-279.
14. Himmelspach J. Ewald R. Uhrmacher A.M. A flexible and scalable experimentation layer. In: proceedings of the 40th conference on winter simulation, 2008.
15. Miller J.E. et al. Graphite: a distributed parallel simulator for multicores. In: proceedings of the 2010 IEEE 16th international symposium on high performance computer architecture (HPCA), 2010.
16. Zhou S.P. et al. Flexible state update mechanism for large-scale distributed wargame simulations. Simulation 2007; 83: 707-719.
17. Taylor S.J.E. et al. Distributed computing and modeling and simulation: speeding up simulations and creating large models. In: proceedings of the winter simulation conference, 2011, pp.161-175.
18. Rak M. Cuomo A. Villano U. mJADES: Concurrent simulation in the cloud. In: the proceedings of sixth international conference on complex, intelligent and software intensive systems (CISIS), 2012.
19. Van Vliet H. Software engineering: principles and practice. Chichester, UK: Wiley, 2006.
20. IEEE 1278.1 and 1278.1A:1995. IEEE standard for distributed interactive simulation-application protocols (set).
21. IEEE 1516:2000. IEEE standard for modeling and simulation (M&S) high level architecture (HLA) – framework and rules.
22. Miles R. Hamilton K. Learning UML 2.0. Sebastopol, CA, USA: O’Reilly, 2006.
23. Hord R.M. Parallel supercomputing in SIMD architectures. Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press, 1990.
24. Heidelberger P. Statistical analysis of parallel simulations. In: proceedings of winter simulation conference, 1983, pp.290-295.
25. Marr C. et al. A Java-based simulation manager for web-based simulation. In: proceedings of the 32nd winter simulation conference, 2000, pp.1815-1822.
26. Globus alliance. GRAM – Globus, http://dev.globus.org/wiki/GRAM (accessed August 2013).
27. HT Condor. HTCondor Home, http://research.cs.wisc.edu/htcondor/ (accessed August 2013).
28. Oracle. Oracle Grid Engine, http://www.oracle.com/us/products/tools/oracle-grid-engine-075549.html (accessed August 2013).
29. Berkeley. Boinc, http://boinc.berkeley.edu/ (accessed August 2013).
30. Digipede. Grid computing for Windows: distributed computing: cluster computing: grid computing for NET, http://www.digipede.net (accessed August 2013).
31. Gehlsen B. Page B. A framework for distributed simulation optimization. In: proceedings of the winter simulation conference, 2001, pp.508-514.
32. Page E. et al. Goal-directed grid-enabled computing for legacy simulations. In: proceedings of the cluster, cloud and grid computing, ACM/IEEE international symposium, 2012, pp.873-879.
33. Globus Alliance. Gridway home, http://dev.globus.org/wiki/GridWay (accessed August 2013).
34. Bononi L. et al. Concurrent replication of parallel and distributed simulations. In: proceedings of the workshop on principles of advanced and distributed simulation, 2005, pp.234-243.
35. Bononi L. et al. ARTIS: a parallel and distributed simulation middleware for performance evaluation. In: proceedings of the 19th international symposium on computer and information sciences (ISCIS 2004), 2004, pp.627-637.
36. Kite S. Taylor S.J.E. SakerGrid: simulation experimentation using grid enabled simulation software. In: proceedings of the winter simulation conference, 2011, pp.2278-2288.
37. Cuomo A. Rak M. Villano U. Process-oriented discrete-event simulation in Java with continuations: quantitative performance evaluation. In: proceedings of international conference on simulation and modeling methodologies, technologies and applications (SIMULTECH), Rome, 2012, pp.87-96.
38. Petcu D. Craciun C. Rak M. Towards a cross platform cloud API - components for cloud federation. In: proceedings of the international conference on cloud computing and services science, 2011.
39. Wang D. et al. DRAMsim: a memory system simulator. Comput Architect News 2005; 33: 100-107.
40. MacGougan G. et al. Performance analysis of a stand-alone high-sensitivity receiver. GPS Solutions 2002; 6: 179-195.
41. Brase J.M. Brown D.L. Modeling, simulation and analysis of complex networked systems: a program plan. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, LLNL-TR-4112733, 2009. http://science.energy.gov/~/media/ascr/pdf/program-documents/docs/Complex_networked_systems_program_final.pdf.
42. Butler K.L. Ehsani M. Kamath P. A Matlab-based modeling and simulation package for electric and hybrid electric vehicle design. IEEE Trans Veh Tech 1999; 48: 1770-1778.
43. Sunshine C.A. Survey of protocol definition and verification techniques. Comput Network (1976) 1978; 2: 346-350.
44. Odell J.H. Parunak V.D. Bauer B. Representing agent interaction protocols in UML. In: proceedings of agent-oriented software engineering, 2001.
45. Yuang M.C. Survey of protocol verification techniques based on finite state machine models. In: proceedings of the computer networking symposium, 1988.
46. Ling Y. Chen S. Chiang C.Y.J. On optimal deadlock detection scheduling. IEEE Trans Comput 2006; 55: 1178-1187.
47. Kim T.G. et al. DEVSim++ toolset for defense modeling and simulation and interoperation. J Defens Model Simulat 2011; 8: 129-142.
48. Department of the Army, Korea Combat Training Center, http://www.kctc.mil.kr/main.html (accessed December 2012).
49. Best B.J. Lebiere C. Scarpinatto K.C. Modeling synthetic opponents in MOUT training simulations using the ACT-R cognitive architecture. In: proceedings of the 11th conference on computer generated forces and behavior representation, 2002.
50. Driels M.R. Weaponeering conventional weapon system effectiveness. Reston, VA, USA: AIAA Education Series, 2004.