LABATCH.2: software for statistical analysis of simulation sample path data
Proceedings of the 30th conference on Winter simulation
Improved batching for confidence interval construction in steady-state simulation
Proceedings of the 31st conference on Winter simulation: Simulation---a bridge to the future - Volume 1
Experimental performance evaluation of batch means procedures for simulation output analysis
Proceedings of the 32nd conference on Winter simulation
Time Series Analysis: Forecasting and Control
Time Series Analysis: Forecasting and Control
Convergence Properties of the Batch Means Method for Simulation Output Analysis
INFORMS Journal on Computing
An Improved Batch Means Procedure for Simulation Output Analysis
Management Science
ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation (TOMACS)
Output analysis: ASAP2: an improved batch means procedure for simulation output analysis
Proceedings of the 34th conference on Winter simulation: exploring new frontiers
Simulation output analysis: a wavelet-based spectral method for steady-state simulation analysis
Proceedings of the 35th conference on Winter simulation: driving innovation
ASAP3: a batch means procedure for steady-state simulation analysis
ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation (TOMACS)
Steady-state simulation analysis using ASAP3
WSC '04 Proceedings of the 36th conference on Winter simulation
Winter Simulation Conference
Hi-index | 0.00 |
An experimental performance evaluation of ASAP3 is presented, including several queueing systems with characteristics typically encountered in practical applications of steady-state simulation analysis procedures. Based on the method of nonoverlapping batch means, ASAP3 is a sequential procedure designed to produce a confidence-interval estimator of a steady-state mean response that satisfies user-specified precision and coverage-probability requirements. ASAP3 is compared with its predecessor ASAP and the batch means procedure of Law and Carson (LC) in the following test problems: (a) queue waiting times in the M/M/1/LIFO, M/H2/1, and M/M/1 queues with 80% server utilization; and (b) response (sojourn) times in a central server model of a computer system. Regarding conformance to the given precision and coverage-probability requirements, ASAP3 compared favorably with the ASAP and LC procedures. Regarding the average sample sizes needed to satisfy progressively more stringent precision requirements, ASAP3's efficiency was reasonable for the given test problems.