skip to main content
research-article
Public Access

Multivariate Input Uncertainty in Output Analysis for Stochastic Simulation

Published:23 October 2016Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

When we use simulations to estimate the performance of stochastic systems, the simulation is often driven by input models estimated from finite real-world data. A complete statistical characterization of system performance estimates requires quantifying both input model and simulation estimation errors. The components of input models in many complex systems could be dependent. In this paper, we represent the distribution of a random vector by its marginal distributions and a dependence measure: either product-moment or Spearman rank correlations. To quantify the impact from dependent input model and simulation estimation errors on system performance estimates, we propose a metamodel-assisted bootstrap framework that is applicable to cases when the parametric family of multivariate input distributions is known or unknown. In either case, we first characterize the input models by their moments that are estimated using real-world data. Then, we employ the bootstrap to quantify the input estimation error, and an equation-based stochastic kriging metamodel to propagate the input uncertainty to the output mean, which can also reduce the influence of simulation estimation error due to output variability. Asymptotic analysis provides theoretical support for our approach, while an empirical study demonstrates that it has good finite-sample performance.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

References

  1. Bruce E. Ankenman, Barry L. Nelson, and Jeremy Staum. 2010. Stochastic kriging for simulation metamodeling. Operations Research 58 (2010), 371--382. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Eusebio Arenal-Gutiérrez, Carlos Matrán, and Juan A. Cuesta-Albertos. 1996. Unconditional Glivenko-Gantelli-type theorems and weak laws of large numbers for bootstrap. Statistics 8 Probability Letters 26 (1996), 365--375.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Francois Bachoc. 2013. Cross validation and maximum likelihood estimations of hyper-parameters of Gaussian processes with model misspecification. Computational Statistics 8 Data Analysis 66 (2013), 55--69.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Russell R. Barton. 2007. Presenting a more complete characterization of uncertainty: Can it be done? In Proceedings of the 2007 INFORMS Simulation Society Research Workshop. INFORMS Simulation Society, Fontainebleau.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Russell R. Barton. 2012. Tutorial: Input uncertainty in output analysis. In Proceedings of the 2012 Winter Simulation Conference, C. Laroque, J. Himmelspach, R. Pasupathy, O. Rose, and A. M. Uhrmacher (Eds.). IEEE Computer Society, 67--78. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Russell R. Barton, Barry L. Nelson, and Wei Xie. 2014. Quantifying input uncertainty via simulation confidence intervals. Informs Journal on Computing 26 (2014), 74--87. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Russell R. Barton and Lee W. Schruben. 1993. Uniform and bootstrap resampling of input distributions. In Proceedings of the 1993 Winter Simulation Conference, G. W. Evans, M. Mollaghasemi, E. C. Russell, and W. E. Biles (Eds.). IEEE Computer Society, 503--508. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Russell R. Barton and Lee W. Schruben. 2001. Resampling methods for input modeling. In Proceedings of the 2001 Winter Simulation Conference, B. A. Peters, J. S. Smith, D. J. Medeiros, and M. W. Rohrer (Eds.). IEEE Computer Society, 372--378. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Bahar Biller and Canan G. Corlu. 2011. Accounting for parameter uncertainty in large-scale stochastic simulations with correlated inputs. Operations Research 59 (2011), 661--673. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Bahar Biller and Soumyadip Ghosh. 2006. Multivariate input processes. In Handbooks in Operations Research and Management Science: Simulation, S. Henderson and B. L. Nelson (Eds.). Elsevier, Chapter 5.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Patrick Billingsley. 1995. Probability and Measure. Wiley-Interscience, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Marne C. Cario and Barry L. Nelson. 1997. Modeling and Generating Random Vectors with Arbitrary Marginal Distributions and Correlation Matrix. Technical report. Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Sciences, Northwestern University.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Xi Chen, Bruce E. Ankenman, and Barry L. Nelson. 2012. The effect of common random numbers on stochastic kriging metamodels. ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation 22 (2012), 7:1--7:20. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Russell C. H. Cheng and Wayne Holland. 1997. Sensitivity of computer simulation experiments to errors in input data. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation 57 (1997), 219--241.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Robert T. Clemen and Terence Reilly. 1999. Correlations and copulas for decision and risk analysis. Management Science 45 (1999), 208--224.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Sourav Das, Tata S. Rao, and Georgi N. Boshnakov. 2012. On the Estimation of Parameters of Variograms of Spatial Stationary Isotropic Random Processes. Research Report No. 2. The University of Manchester.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Soumyadip Ghosh and Shane G. Henderson. 2002a. Chessboard distributions and random vectors with specified marginals and covariance matrix. Operations Research 50 (2002), 820--834. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Soumyadip Ghosh and Shane G. Henderson. 2002b. Properties of the NORTA method in higher dimensions. In Proceedings of the 2002 Winter Simulation Conference, E. Yűcesan, C. H. Chen, J. L. Snowdon, and J. M. Charnes (Eds.). IEEE Computer Society, 263--269. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Peter Hall. 1988. Rate of convergence in bootstrap approximations. The Annals of Probability 16 (1988), 1665--1684.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Shane G. Henderson, Belinda A. Chiera, and Roger M. Cooke. 2000. Generating dependent quasi-random numbers. In Proceedings of the 2000 Winter Simulation Conference, J. A. Joines, R. R. Barton, K. Kang, and P. A. Fishwick (Eds.). IEEE Computer Society, 527--536. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Nicholas J. Higham. 2002. Computing the nearest correlation matrix -- A problem from finance. IMA Journal on Numerical Analysis 22 (2002), 329--343.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Mark E. Johnson. 1987. Multivariate Statistical Simulation. Wiley, New York. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Donald R. Jones, Matthias Schonlau, and William J. Welch. 1998. Efficient global optimization of expensive black-box functions. Journal of Global Optimization 13 (1998), 455--492. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Keebom Kang and Bruce Schmeiser. 1990. Graphical methods for evaluation and comparing confidence-interval procedures. Operations Research 38, 3 (1990), 546--553. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Shing T. Li and Joseph L. Hammond. 1975. Generation of pseudorandom numbers with specified univariate distributions and correlation coefficients. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 5 (September 1975), 557--561.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Jason L. Loeppky, Jerome Sacks, and William J. Welch. 2009. Choosing the sample size of a computer experiment: A practical guide. Technometrics 51 (2009), 366--376.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Tanmoy Mukhopadhyay, Sushanta Chakroborty, Sondipon Adhikari, and Rajib Chowdhury. 2016. A critical assessment of kriging model variants for high-fidelity uncertainty quantification in dynamics of composite shells. Archives on Computational Methods in Engineering (2016). Online version.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Bruce W. Schmeiser and Ram Lal. 1982. Bivariate gamma random vectors. Operations Research 30, 2 (1982), 355--374.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Jun Shao and Dongsheng Tu. 1995. The Jackknife and Bootstrap. Springer-Verlag.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Eunhye Song, Barry L. Nelson, and C. Dennis Pegden. 2014. Advanced tutorial: Input uncertainty quantification. In Proceedings of the 2014 Winter Simulation Conference, A. Tolk, S. Y. Diallo, I. O. Ryzhov, L. Yilmaz, S. Buckley, and J. A. Miller (Eds.). IEEE Computer Society. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. A. W. Van Der Vaart. 1998. Asymptotic Statistics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. William R. Wade. 2010. An Introduction to Analysis (4th ed.). Prentice Hall.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Wei B. Wu and Jan Mielniczuk. 2010. A new look at measuring dependence. In Dependence in Probability and Statistics, P. Doukhan, G. Lang, D. Surgailis, and G. Teyssière (Eds.). Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Wei Xie, Barry L. Nelson, and Russell R. Barton. 2014a. A Bayesian framework for quantifying uncertainty in stochastic simulation. Operational Research 62, 6 (2014), 1439--1452.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Wei Xie, Barry L. Nelson, and Russell R. Barton. 2014b. Statistical uncertainty analysis for stochastic simulation with dependent input models. In Proceedings of the 2014 Winter Simulation Conference, A. Tolk, S. Y. Diallo, I. O. Ryzhov, L. Yilmaz, S. Buckley, and J. A. Miller (Eds.). IEEE Computer Society. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Wei Xie, Barry L. Nelson, and Russell R. Barton. 2015. Statistical uncertainty analysis for stochastic simulation. (2015). Working Paper, Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Wei Xie, Barry L. Nelson, and Jeremy Staum. 2010. The influence of correlation functions on stochastic kriging metamodels. In Proceedings of the 2010 Winter Simulation Conference, B. Johansson, S. Jain, J. Montoya-Torres, J. Hugan, and E. Yucesan (Eds.). IEEE Computer Society, 1067--1078. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Jun Yin, Szu H. Ng, and Kien M. Ng. 2009. A study on the effects of parameter estimation on kriging model’s prediction error in stochastic simulation. In Proceedings of the 2009 Winter Simulation Conference, B. Johansson A. Dunkin M. D. Rossetti, R. R. Hill and R. G. Ingalls (Eds.). IEEE Computer Society, 674--685. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Multivariate Input Uncertainty in Output Analysis for Stochastic Simulation

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation
      ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation  Volume 27, Issue 1
      January 2017
      150 pages
      ISSN:1049-3301
      EISSN:1558-1195
      DOI:10.1145/2982568
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2016 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 23 October 2016
      • Accepted: 1 August 2016
      • Revised: 1 July 2016
      • Received: 1 October 2014
      Published in tomacs Volume 27, Issue 1

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader