Input–Output Uncertainty Comparisons for Discrete Optimization via Simulation
Selecting the optimal policy using simulation is subject to input model risk when input models that mimic real-world randomness in the simulation have estimation error due to finite sample sizes. Instead of trying to find the optimal solution under unknown real-world input distributions by taking a...
Saved in:
Published in | Operations research Vol. 67; no. 2; pp. 562 - 576 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
Linthicum
INFORMS
01.03.2019
Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
ISSN | 0030-364X 1526-5463 |
DOI | 10.1287/opre.2018.1796 |
Cover
Abstract | Selecting the optimal policy using simulation is subject to input model risk when input models that mimic real-world randomness in the simulation have estimation error due to finite sample sizes. Instead of trying to find the optimal solution under unknown real-world input distributions by taking a conservative stance or with low statistical guarantee, the input–output uncertainty comparisons (IOU-C) procedure finds a set of solutions that cannot be separated from the best given the resolution decided by the finite sample sizes. The common-input-data (CID) effects measure how differently solutions are affected by the common estimated input models. When CID effects of two systems are positively correlated, the comparison becomes easier than estimating the performance measures of two systems precisely under input model risk; the IOU-C procedure takes advantage of the CID effects to develop a sharp comparison and thereby provides a small subset even in the presence of input model risk.
When input distributions to a simulation model are estimated from real-world data, they naturally have estimation error causing
input uncertainty
in the simulation output. If an optimization via simulation (OvS) method is applied that treats the input distributions as “correct,” then there is a risk of making a suboptimal decision for the real world, which we call
input model risk
. This paper addresses a discrete OvS (DOvS) problem of selecting the real-world optimal from among a finite number of systems when all of them share the same input distributions estimated from common input data. Because input uncertainty cannot be reduced without collecting additional real-world data—which may be expensive or impossible—a DOvS procedure should reflect the limited resolution provided by the simulation model in distinguishing the real-world optimal solution from the others. In light of this, our input–output uncertainty comparisons (IOU-C) procedure focuses on
comparisons rather than selection
: it provides simultaneous confidence intervals for the difference between each system’s real-world mean and the best mean of the rest with any desired probability, while accounting for both stochastic and input uncertainty. To make the resolution as high as possible (intervals as short as possible) we exploit the common input data effect to reduce uncertainty in the estimated differences. Under mild conditions we prove that the IOU-C procedure provides the desired statistical guarantee asymptotically as the real-world sample size and simulation effort increase, but it is designed to be effective in finite samples.
The electronic companion of this paper is available at
https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.2018.1796
. |
---|---|
AbstractList | When input distributions to a simulation model are estimated from real-world data, they naturally have estimation error causing input uncertainty in the simulation output. If an optimization via simulation (OvS) method is applied that treats the input distributions as "correct," then there is a risk of making a suboptimal decision for the real world, which we call input model risk. This paper addresses a discrete OvS (DOvS) problem of selecting the real-world optimal from among a finite number of systems when all of them share the same input distributions estimated from common input data. Because input uncertainty cannot be reduced without collecting additional real-world data—which may be expensive or impossible—a DOvS procedure should reflect the limited resolution provided by the simulation model in distinguishing the real-world optimal solution from the others. In light of this, our input–output uncertainty comparisons (IOU-C) procedure focuses on comparisons rather than selection: it provides simultaneous confidence intervals for the difference between each system's real-world mean and the best mean of the rest with any desired probability, while accounting for both stochastic and input uncertainty. To make the resolution as high as possible (intervals as short as possible) we exploit the common input data effect to reduce uncertainty in the estimated differences. Under mild conditions we prove that the IOU-C procedure provides the desired statistical guarantee asymptotically as the real-world sample size and simulation effort increase, but it is designed to be effective in finite samples. When input distributions to a simulation model are estimated from real-world data, they naturally have estimation error causing input uncertainty in the simulation output. If an optimization via simulation (OvS) method is applied that treats the input distributions as "correct," then there is a risk of making a suboptimal decision for the real world, which we call input model risk. This paper addresses a discrete OvS (DOvS) problem of selecting the real-world optimal from among a finite number of systems when all of them share the same input distributions estimated from common input data. Because input uncertainty cannot be reduced without collecting additional real-world data--which may be expensive or impossible--a DOvS procedure should reflect the limited resolution provided by the simulation model in distinguishing the real-world optimal solution from the others. In light of this, our input-output uncertainty comparisons (IOU-C) procedure focuses on comparisons rather than selection: it provides simultaneous confidence intervals for the difference between each system's real-world mean and the best mean of the rest with any desired probability, while accounting for both stochastic and input uncertainty. To make the resolution as high as possible (intervals as short as possible) we exploit the common input data effect to reduce uncertainty in the estimated differences. Under mild conditions we prove that the IOU-C procedure provides the desired statistical guarantee asymptotically as the real-world sample size and simulation effort increase, but it is designed to be effective in finite samples. Funding: This study was supported by the National Science Foundation [Grant CMMI-1068473]. Supplemental Material: The electronic companion of this paper is available at Keywords: optimization via simulation under input uncertainty * common-input-data effect * multiple comparisons with the best Selecting the optimal policy using simulation is subject to input model risk when input models that mimic real-world randomness in the simulation have estimation error due to finite sample sizes. Instead of trying to find the optimal solution under unknown real-world input distributions by taking a conservative stance or with low statistical guarantee, the input–output uncertainty comparisons (IOU-C) procedure finds a set of solutions that cannot be separated from the best given the resolution decided by the finite sample sizes. The common-input-data (CID) effects measure how differently solutions are affected by the common estimated input models. When CID effects of two systems are positively correlated, the comparison becomes easier than estimating the performance measures of two systems precisely under input model risk; the IOU-C procedure takes advantage of the CID effects to develop a sharp comparison and thereby provides a small subset even in the presence of input model risk. When input distributions to a simulation model are estimated from real-world data, they naturally have estimation error causing input uncertainty in the simulation output. If an optimization via simulation (OvS) method is applied that treats the input distributions as “correct,” then there is a risk of making a suboptimal decision for the real world, which we call input model risk . This paper addresses a discrete OvS (DOvS) problem of selecting the real-world optimal from among a finite number of systems when all of them share the same input distributions estimated from common input data. Because input uncertainty cannot be reduced without collecting additional real-world data—which may be expensive or impossible—a DOvS procedure should reflect the limited resolution provided by the simulation model in distinguishing the real-world optimal solution from the others. In light of this, our input–output uncertainty comparisons (IOU-C) procedure focuses on comparisons rather than selection : it provides simultaneous confidence intervals for the difference between each system’s real-world mean and the best mean of the rest with any desired probability, while accounting for both stochastic and input uncertainty. To make the resolution as high as possible (intervals as short as possible) we exploit the common input data effect to reduce uncertainty in the estimated differences. Under mild conditions we prove that the IOU-C procedure provides the desired statistical guarantee asymptotically as the real-world sample size and simulation effort increase, but it is designed to be effective in finite samples. The electronic companion of this paper is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.2018.1796 . |
ArticleNumber | opre.2018.1796 |
Audience | Trade |
Author | Song, Eunhye Nelson, Barry L. |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Eunhye surname: Song fullname: Song, Eunhye – sequence: 2 givenname: Barry L. surname: Nelson fullname: Nelson, Barry L. |
BookMark | eNqFkstqGzEUhkVJoE7SbXeFgUJXHUeXkWa0DO4tEPAiDXQnZPmMKzMjTSVNabrqO_QN-yTVxCWuwaUIdOP7zzk6-s_QifMOEHpO8JzQpr70Q4A5xaSZk1qKJ2hGOBUlrwQ7QTOMGS6ZqD49RWcxbjHGkgs-Q8trN4zp14-fyzHlTXHnDISkrUv3xcL3gw42eheL1ofijY0mQIJiOSTb2-86We-Kr1YXt7Yfu4fjBTptdRfh2Z_1HN29e_tx8aG8Wb6_XlzdlCanTWWrKeFCaE01I-u2FVJKjmvA1NS6qXjNAbO15BUw3dZsJYFjsiKSCG0Y1Jqdo5e7uEPwX0aISW39GFxOqSgVlaS4InhPbXQHyrrWp6BNn9-hrnjDq0rmiJkqj1AbcBB0l3vc2nx9wM-P8HmsobfmqODVgSAzCb6ljR5jVIfg67_A1Ritg5inaDefU9zxB3i1w03wMQZolbHp4RtyQbZTBKvJGWpyhpqcoSZn7Ot_lA3B9jrc_1vwYifYxuTDI01rKjlr6n0Dp16EPv4v3m_fltUU |
CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1145_3617595 crossref_primary_10_1080_24725854_2020_1856981 |
Cites_doi | 10.1145/174153.174158 10.1016/0378-3758(92)90106-3 10.1002/9780471722199.ch5 10.1109/WSC.2012.6465266 10.1080/00949659708811809 10.1109/WSC.2006.323107 10.1016/j.automatica.2017.03.019 10.1287/opre.1090.0741 10.1057/jos.2015.2 10.1080/03610918508812467 10.1080/00949659808811887 10.1109/WSC.2013.6721478 10.1109/WSC.2015.7408185 10.1109/WSC.2015.7408183 10.1007/978-1-4899-7180-7 10.1007/978-1-4939-1384-8 10.1109/WSC.2014.7019886 10.1109/WSC.2016.7822088 10.1287/mnsc.1120.1641 10.1109/9.119632 10.1109/WSC.2013.6721442 10.1287/mnsc.41.12.1935 |
ContentType | Journal Article |
Copyright | Copyright: © 2019 INFORMS COPYRIGHT 2019 Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences Copyright Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences Mar/Apr 2019 |
Copyright_xml | – notice: Copyright: © 2019 INFORMS – notice: COPYRIGHT 2019 Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences – notice: Copyright Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences Mar/Apr 2019 |
DBID | AAYXX CITATION N95 JQ2 K9. |
DOI | 10.1287/opre.2018.1796 |
DatabaseName | CrossRef Gale Business: Insights ProQuest Computer Science Collection ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) |
DatabaseTitle | CrossRef ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) ProQuest Computer Science Collection |
DatabaseTitleList | ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) |
DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Engineering Sciences (General) Computer Science Business |
EISSN | 1526-5463 |
EndPage | 576 |
ExternalDocumentID | A585449916 10_1287_opre_2018_1796 27295387 opre20181796 |
Genre | Methods |
GeographicLocations | New Jersey |
GeographicLocations_xml | – name: New Jersey |
GroupedDBID | 02 08R 123 1AW 1OL 29N 2AX 3V. 4.4 7WY 7X7 85S 88E 8AL 8AO 8FE 8FG 8FI 8FJ 8FL 8G5 8V8 92 AABCJ ABBHK ABDEX ABEFU ABJCF ABPPZ ABSIS ABUWG ACDCL ACHQT ACIWK ACNCT ACUWV ACVYA ADBBV ADGDI ADNFJ AENEX AETEA AEUPB AFFNX AFKRA AJPNJ AKVCP ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS AQNXB AQSKT ARAPS AZQEC B-7 BBAFP BENPR BEZIV BGLVJ BPHCQ BVXVI CBXGM CCKSF CS3 CWXUR CYVLN DWQXO DZ EBA EBE EBO EBR EBS EBU ECR EHE EJD EMI EMK EPL F20 F5P FH7 FRNLG FYUFA G8K GENNL GNUQQ GROUPED_ABI_INFORM_COMPLETE GROUPED_ABI_INFORM_RESEARCH GUPYA GUQSH HCIFZ HGD HVGLF H~9 IAO ICJ IEA IGG IOF ITC JAV JBC JPL JSODD JST K6 K60 K6V K7- L6V LI M0C M0N M1P M1Q M2O M7S MBDVC MV1 N95 NIEAY P2P P62 PQEST PQQKQ PQUKI PRG PROAC PSQYO PTHSS QVA RNS RPU SA0 TAE TH9 TN5 U5U VQA WH7 X XFK XHC XI7 XJT XXP Y99 YHZ YNT YZZ ZCG ZY4 -DZ -~X 18M AAWTO ABKVW ABWPA ABYYQ ACGFO ACSVP ACXJH ADEPB ADMHG ADNWM AEGXH AEMOZ AFAIT AFTQD AHAJD AHQJS AIAGR ALIPV BAAKF HF~ IPSME JAAYA JBMMH JBZCM JENOY JHFFW JKQEH JLEZI JLXEF JPPEU K1G K6~ XSW ~02 ~92 AAYXX CITATION JQ2 K9. |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c565t-fa21566aa2a31dff6999507e02c7a84575e03d954e3af73b9e501b1916ac3e7a3 |
ISSN | 0030-364X |
IngestDate | Fri Jul 25 10:50:10 EDT 2025 Tue Jun 17 22:09:54 EDT 2025 Fri Jun 13 00:00:20 EDT 2025 Tue Jun 10 21:03:47 EDT 2025 Fri Jun 27 05:28:54 EDT 2025 Fri May 23 02:45:51 EDT 2025 Thu Apr 24 23:07:31 EDT 2025 Tue Jul 01 00:21:48 EDT 2025 Mon May 19 02:50:11 EDT 2025 Wed Jan 06 02:48:03 EST 2021 |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 2 |
Language | English |
LinkModel | OpenURL |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c565t-fa21566aa2a31dff6999507e02c7a84575e03d954e3af73b9e501b1916ac3e7a3 |
Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 |
ORCID | 0000-0002-1325-2624 0000-0002-5171-0614 |
PQID | 2264920410 |
PQPubID | 37962 |
PageCount | 15 |
ParticipantIDs | crossref_citationtrail_10_1287_opre_2018_1796 jstor_primary_27295387 informs_primary_10_1287_opre_2018_1796 gale_incontextgauss__A585449916 gale_infotracgeneralonefile_A585449916 gale_infotracacademiconefile_A585449916 proquest_journals_2264920410 gale_businessinsightsgauss_A585449916 crossref_primary_10_1287_opre_2018_1796 gale_infotracmisc_A585449916 |
ProviderPackageCode | Y99 RPU NIEAY CITATION AAYXX |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | 2019-03-01 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2019-03-01 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 03 year: 2019 text: 2019-03-01 day: 01 |
PublicationDecade | 2010 |
PublicationPlace | Linthicum |
PublicationPlace_xml | – name: Linthicum |
PublicationTitle | Operations research |
PublicationYear | 2019 |
Publisher | INFORMS Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences |
Publisher_xml | – name: INFORMS – name: Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences |
References | B20 B10 B21 B11 B22 B12 B23 B13 B24 B14 B15 B16 B17 B18 B19 B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 Amemiya T (B1) 1985 Scarf H (B19) 1958 |
References_xml | – ident: B8 – ident: B12 – ident: B9 – ident: B11 – ident: B13 – ident: B14 – ident: B10 – ident: B3 – ident: B2 – ident: B20 – ident: B1 – ident: B4 – ident: B7 – ident: B5 – ident: B6 – ident: B24 – ident: B22 – ident: B23 – ident: B21 – ident: B17 – ident: B18 – ident: B16 – ident: B15 – ident: B19 – ident: B17 doi: 10.1145/174153.174158 – ident: B4 doi: 10.1016/0378-3758(92)90106-3 – ident: B20 doi: 10.1002/9780471722199.ch5 – start-page: 201 volume-title: Studies in the Mathematical Theory of Inventory and Production year: 1958 ident: B19 – ident: B2 doi: 10.1109/WSC.2012.6465266 – ident: B5 doi: 10.1080/00949659708811809 – ident: B24 doi: 10.1109/WSC.2006.323107 – ident: B12 doi: 10.1016/j.automatica.2017.03.019 – ident: B9 doi: 10.1287/opre.1090.0741 – ident: B16 doi: 10.1057/jos.2015.2 – ident: B14 doi: 10.1080/03610918508812467 – ident: B6 doi: 10.1080/00949659808811887 – ident: B10 doi: 10.1109/WSC.2013.6721478 – ident: B8 doi: 10.1109/WSC.2015.7408185 – ident: B21 doi: 10.1109/WSC.2015.7408183 – ident: B13 doi: 10.1007/978-1-4899-7180-7 – volume-title: Advanced Econometrics year: 1985 ident: B1 – ident: B11 doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-1384-8 – ident: B22 doi: 10.1109/WSC.2014.7019886 – ident: B15 doi: 10.1109/WSC.2016.7822088 – ident: B3 doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1120.1641 – ident: B23 doi: 10.1109/9.119632 – ident: B7 doi: 10.1109/WSC.2013.6721442 – ident: B18 doi: 10.1287/mnsc.41.12.1935 |
SSID | ssj0009565 |
Score | 2.4440868 |
Snippet | Selecting the optimal policy using simulation is subject to input model risk when input models that mimic real-world randomness in the simulation have... When input distributions to a simulation model are estimated from real-world data, they naturally have estimation error causing input uncertainty in the... |
SourceID | proquest gale crossref jstor informs |
SourceType | Aggregation Database Enrichment Source Index Database Publisher |
StartPage | 562 |
SubjectTerms | Analysis common-input-data effect Computer simulation Confidence intervals Decision-making Input output analysis Mathematical optimization Methods multiple comparisons with the best Operations research Optimization optimization via simulation under input uncertainty Simulation Statistical analysis Statistical methods Uncertainty |
Title | Input–Output Uncertainty Comparisons for Discrete Optimization via Simulation |
URI | https://www.jstor.org/stable/27295387 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2264920410 |
Volume | 67 |
hasFullText | 1 |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV3fb9MwELagEwgegBUmCgP8AIypymgdx2kfx7RpgLYhbUN7ixzHGZNYVjUp0vjrOcfnxGHj50taRafY8X253Dl33xHyMpJZrnKWBiLlMuBCRIHkUoFC8lhN-TQTtab39sXuMf9wEp20PTbr6pIq3VDfr60r-R-twjnQq6mS_QfNNheFE_Af9AtH0DAc_0rH74vZogoOFhX8gPeo7Of9Cp_yurtgTbdgODbBO6z08AAsxDmWXg6_ncnh4dk5NvDy3dSDmZ5jjhyyATW7xoeYw7u9KL5cNqjY14718Z2czy-xlgF3E0wBU-jvJrQZCmZy3mAuD7DJ62yzc5wV8jcXwXQEobC5l87O2rYbiCfmGc3I2uMrxpyZ7ZAd0wzGpOBNNsB2_MSabYl7IeLh3Pi5N8kSi8GF6pGlzY-ftz557MvCtrLAaSF7Jwzwtnv5jneC7-hblsK2dBmrV97atSty9IDcwxiCblpALJMbuuiT266EoU_uu1YdFNesT-56vJN9suzWkr5B2vH1h2TPRxP10EQ9NFGYI3Vooj6aKKCJtmh6RI53to-2dgNsthEoWJwqyCUzobyUTIbjLM8FRA4QK-gRU7GccPDq9SjMphHXoczjMJ3qaDROIdoXUoU6luEK6RUXhX5MaCwk-PEZLLbK-QREUyUyNsk1uOqCazYggVvkRCETvWmI8jUxESkoJTFKSYxSEqOUAVlr5GeWg-WXkq-MzhJs4AqH0mxxladyUZZJC5QBeVHLGQKUwmRYWYGOxBpK5BcwNyWxWgXu0BCmdSRfdyRPrd6uE1ztCIIdV93rIND-eJMrNQ4bMQYBMvgtMQzggJmglSoTUyg_ZSM-Hj35_fhPyZ3WIKySXjVf6GfgcFfpc3ycfgDyadl8 |
linkProvider | EBSCOhost |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Input-Output+Uncertainty+Comparisons+for+Discrete+Optimization+via+Simulation&rft.jtitle=Operations+research&rft.au=Song%2C+Eunhye&rft.au=Nelson%2C+Barry+L&rft.date=2019-03-01&rft.pub=Institute+for+Operations+Research+and+the+Management+Sciences&rft.issn=0030-364X&rft.volume=67&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=562&rft_id=info:doi/10.1287%2Fopre.2018.1796&rft.externalDocID=A585449916 |
thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=0030-364X&client=summon |
thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=0030-364X&client=summon |
thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=0030-364X&client=summon |