Model reuse versus model development: Effects on credibility and learning

Abstract

The construction of generic models and their validity when reused has received much attention in the DES literature. This is with good reason as rapid deployment of a generic model can reduce time, effort and cost of a study. On the other hand the utility of model reuse as an aid to decision making has had little exploration. This is an area that should be considered as the literature on learning from just simulation model use provides contradictory evidence on its effectiveness. This paper proposes that development of models with some client involvement has alternative benefits to reusing a model: improved learning and understanding for clients. To explore this proposition an experimental design to compare how model reuse and model development affect learning in DES studies is presented. Some preliminary thoughts, based on pilot experiments, on the client process of credibility assessment and understanding of resource utilisation are discussed.

Maximising stakeholder learning by looping again through the simulation life-cycle: A case study in public transport

“…This study further contributes to the conceptual modelling literature by demonstrating how HPM can be used in problem structuring to support conceptual model development and experimental design. Monks et al (2009) note that one of the main benefits of simulation is the learning that is generated through the process of model development. Based on our experience, further iterations of the simulation life-cycle, while carefully maintaining stakeholder engagement throughout, provided additional learning opportunities and incrementally improved EIL's understanding of the system and, hence, improve its performance.…”

“…Time saved, in turn, can instead be used to extend the scope of the project (e.g., simulating more scenarios). On the other hand, while the time and cost implications of developing a simulation model from scratch can be off-putting for many organisations, various authors suggest that time spent developing a model is an important factor in generating learning (Monks, Robinson, & Kotiadis, 2009). The process of model development is key to understanding the problem and, to an extent, solving it (Robinson, 2004).…”

“…The process of model development is key to understanding the problem and, to an extent, solving it (Robinson, 2004). Although new stakeholders involved with extending a simulation model may not achieve the same level of learning due to lack of time spent developing the original simulation model (Monks et al, 2009), this can be ameliorated to some degree through structured engagement (e.g., live demonstrations, facilitated discussion, and follow-on presentations).…”

A Distributed Simulation Model of the Maritime Logistics in an Iron Ore Supply Chain Management

“…Generic models are a well know approach to develop simulation models (Robinson et al, 2004;Monks et al, 2009;Mackulak et al, 1998;Lung et al, 1994). They are based on the concept that some class of models may represent a wide range of similar scenarios, hence they could be used on a frequent and recurrent basis.…”

An experimental design and preliminary results for a cultural training system simulation

“…The general area of verification and validation in simulation (Sargent 2009) covers methods for verification of implementation against requirements and validation of model behavior against observed physical behavior, but is not focused on human performance. Formal studies of humans regarding modeling and simulation are beginning to appear (Tako andRobinson 2009, Monks et al 2009). In terms of empirically analyzing virtual environments, Cooper (2009) finds support for one of two hypotheses indicating a positive relationships between level of engagement and performance.…”