Proceedings of the 2009 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC) 2009
DOI: 10.1109/wsc.2009.5429327
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Verification and validation of simulation models

Abstract: In this paper we discuss verification and validation of simulation models. Four different approaches to deciding model validity are described; two different paradigms that relate verification and validation to the model development process are presented; various validation techniques are defined; conceptual model validity, model verification, operational validity, and data validity are discussed; a way to document results is given; a recommended procedure for model validation is presented; and model accreditat… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
13
0
2

Year Published

2010
2010
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
4
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 62 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
(36 reference statements)
0
13
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The limitations of a computational, theoretical method are evident and involve the inherent assumptions of the mathematical model from both a physiologic and an anatomic position. However, the validation comparisons are considered within the reasonable range of error for this type of biologic modeling ( 31 , 32 ). Further, although more accurate results are possible through manipulation of the mathematics of the model’s parameters and structure, this process would not be true to the experimental literature upon which the model was constructed, potentially leading to conclusion with tenuous foundations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The limitations of a computational, theoretical method are evident and involve the inherent assumptions of the mathematical model from both a physiologic and an anatomic position. However, the validation comparisons are considered within the reasonable range of error for this type of biologic modeling ( 31 , 32 ). Further, although more accurate results are possible through manipulation of the mathematics of the model’s parameters and structure, this process would not be true to the experimental literature upon which the model was constructed, potentially leading to conclusion with tenuous foundations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Metamodeling techniques [29], i.e., modeling the simulation model outputs as functions of simulation inputs, can circumvent getting the simulation results for all variables in the parameter space. These topics are beyond the scope of this report; we suggest reviewing Sargent [30] and Law [31].…”
Section: Model Validationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A clear description of the phenomena to be explained by the model and the testing of the simplest and realistic proxy behavior rules are the key to successful ABM validation [73]. In this regard, Zeigler et al [74] proposed three different types of validity: replicative validity (i.e., the model "matches data already acquired from the real system"), structural validity (i.e., the model "truly reflects the way in which the real system operates") and predictive validity (i.e., the model "matches data before data acquired from the real system"). This paper mainly studies the influence of social groups and social factors on unsafe behaviors, rather than specifically predicting the occurrence of unsafe behaviors.…”
Section: Model Validationmentioning
confidence: 99%