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...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inOperations research Vol. 67; no. 2; pp. 562 - 576
Main Authors Song, Eunhye, Nelson, Barry L.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Linthicum INFORMS 01.03.2019
Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN0030-364X
1526-5463
DOI10.1287/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