A Trajectory for Validating Computational Emulation Models of Organizations
Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory
A hermeneutical approach to external validation of simulation models
Simulation and Gaming - Symposium: International relations and simulation/gaming
Validating simulation-based models of conflict
Simulation and Gaming - Symposium: International relations and simulation/gaming
Philosophical foundations of computer simulation validation
Simulation and Gaming
A fuzzy set theoretic approach to validate simulation models
ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation (TOMACS)
Simulating Internet-based collaboration: A cost-benefit case study using a multi-agent model
Decision Support Systems
A new approach to testing an integrated water systems model using qualitative scenarios
Environmental Modelling & Software
Environmental Modelling & Software
Design science in information systems research
MIS Quarterly
Tactical combat casualty care: strategic issues of a serious simulation game development
Proceedings of the Winter Simulation Conference
A Review for the Validation of Social Simulation on Artificial Social Organization
International Journal of Agent Technologies and Systems
A Bayesian approach to assessing expected utility in the simulation decision
Proceedings of the 2013 Summer Computer Simulation Conference
Hi-index | 0.01 |
There is still considerable doubt and even anxiety among simulation modelers as to what the methodologically correct guidelines or procedures for validating simulation models should be. Epistemically, the approaches one finds in the simulation literature run the gamut from objectivist to relativist with shades in between. At present in the philosophy of science, there appears to be a convergence toward a nonalgorithmic but discursive and nonrelativistic view of the argumentation involved in warranting scientific theorizing. The present paper attempts to give a description of the various philosophical positions as well as to summarize their problems and the kinds of evidentiary arguments they would each allow in arriving at defensible simulation models. From the debate, we attempt to set out a perspective that frees the practioner to pursue a varied set of approaches to validation with a diminished burden of methodological anxiety. Reciprocally this perspective does not let the modeler off of the hook but rather converts the validation problem into an ethical problem in which the practitioner must responsibly and professionally argue for the warrant of the model.