Optimal computing budget allocation for multi-objective simulation models

Simulation plays a vital role in identifying the best system design from among a set of competing designs. To improve simulation efficiency, ranking and selection techniques are often used to determine the number of simulation replications required so that a prespecified level of correct selection is guaranteed at a modest possible computational expense. As most real-life systems are multiobjective in nature, in this paper, we consider a multiobjective ranking and selection problem, where the system designs are evaluated in terms of more than one performance measure. We incorporate the concept of Pareto optimality into the ranking and selection scheme, and try to find all of the nondominated designs rather than a single "best" one. A simple sequential solution method is proposed to allocate the simulation replications. Computational results show that the proposed algorithm is efficient in terms of the total number of replications needed to find the Pareto set.

[1]  Barry L. Nelson,et al.  Statistical screening, selection, and multiple comparison procedures in computer simulation , 1998, 1998 Winter Simulation Conference. Proceedings (Cat. No.98CH36274).

[2]  Donghai He,et al.  Better-than-optimal simulation run allocation? , 2003, Proceedings of the 2003 Winter Simulation Conference, 2003..

[3]  Jürgen Teich,et al.  Pareto-Front Exploration with Uncertain Objectives , 2001, EMO.

[4]  Douglas J. Morrice,et al.  An approach to ranking and selection for multiple performance measures , 1998, 1998 Winter Simulation Conference. Proceedings (Cat. No.98CH36274).

[5]  M. Degroot.  Optimal Statistical Decisions , 1970 .

[6]  Y. Rinott.  On two-stage selection procedures and related probability-inequalities , 1978 .

[7]  A. Tamhane.  Design and Analysis of Experiments for Statistical Selection, Screening, and Multiple Comparisons , 1995 .

[8]  Enver Yücesan,et al.  Discrete-event simulation optimization using ranking, selection, and multiple comparison procedures: A survey , 2003, TOMC.

[9]  S. Jacobson,et al.  Evaluating the Design of a Family Practice Healthcare Clinic Using Discrete-Event Simulation , 2002, Health care management science.

[10]  Chun-Hung Chen,et al.  New development of optimal computing budget allocation for discrete event simulation , 1997, WSC '97.

[11]  Edward J. Dudewicz,et al.  Multivariate ranking and selection without reduction to a univariate problem , 1978, WSC '78.

[12]  Barry L. Nelson,et al.  Ranking, selection and multiple comparisons in computer simulation , 1994, Proceedings of Winter Simulation Conference.

[13]  Stephen E. Chick.  Selecting the best system: a decision-theoretic approach , 1997, WSC '97.

[14]  P. Sánchez,et al.  BETTER-THAN-OPTIMAL SIMULATION RUN ALLOCATION ? , 2003 .

[15]  Lothar Thiele,et al.  Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: a comparative case study and the strength Pareto approach , 1999, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[16]  Chun-Hung Chen,et al.  Special topics on simulation analysis: better-than-optimal simulation run allocation? , 2003, WSC '03.

[17]  Peter J. Fleming,et al.  An Overview of Evolutionary Algorithms in Multiobjective Optimization , 1995, Evolutionary Computation.

[18]  Douglas J. Morrice,et al.  A Multiple Attribute Utility Theory Approach to Ranking and Selection , 2001, Manag. Sci..

[19]  Chun-Hung Chen,et al.  A gradient approach for smartly allocating computing budget for discrete event simulation , 1996, Winter Simulation Conference.