Take a look at the new version of this page: [ beta version ]. Tell us what you think.

ABSTRACT

In this study, we mainly explore how to optimally allocate the computing budget for a multi-objective ranking and selection (MORS) problem when the measure of selection quality is the expected opportunity cost (OC). We define OC incurred to both the observed Pareto and non-Pareto set, and present a sequential procedure to allocate the replications among the designs according to some asymptotic allocation rules. Numerical analysis shows that the proposed solution framework works well when compared with other algorithms in terms of its capability of identifying the true Pareto set.

REFERENCES

• 1: Mahmoud H. Alrefaei , Ameen J. Alawneh, Selecting the best stochastic system for large scale problems in DEDS, Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, v.64 n.2, p.237-245, 27 January [doi>10.1016/j.matcom.2003.09.018]
• 2: Chun-Hung Chen , Jianwu Lin , Enver Yücesan , Stephen E. Chick, Simulation Budget Allocation for Further Enhancing theEfficiency of Ordinal Optimization, Discrete Event Dynamic Systems, v.10 n.3, p.251-270, July 2000 [doi>10.1023/A:1008349927281]
• 3: Chen, E. J. and Kelton, W. D. (2004) Sequential selection procedures: Using sample means to improve efficiency. European Journal of Operational Research,
• 4: Chen, H. C., Chen C. H. and Yücesan, E. (2000) Computing Efforts Allocation for Ordinal Optimization and Discrete Event Simulation. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 45 (5), 960--964.
• 5: Stephen E. Chick, Indifference zone selection procedures: expected opportunity cost guarantees and indifference zone selection procedures, Proceedings of the 35th conference on Winter simulation: driving innovation, December 07-10, 2003, New Orleans, Louisiana
• 6: Stephen E. Chick , Koichiro Inoue, New Two-Stage and Sequential Procedures for Selecting the Best Simulated System, Operations Research, v.49 n.5, p.732-743, September 2001 [doi>10.1287/opre.49.5.732.10615]
• 7: DeGroot, M. H. 1970. Optimal Statistical Decisions. McGraw-Hill, Inc.
• 8: David Goldsman , Barry L. Nelson, Statistical screening, selection, and multiple comparison procedures in computer simulation, Proceedings of the 30th conference on Winter simulation, p.159-166, December 13-16, 1998, Washington, D.C., United States
• 9: He, D., Chick, S. E., and Chen, C. H. (2006). The opportunity cost and OCBA selection procedures in ordinal optimization. Submitted for publication.
• 10: Seong-Hee Kim , Barry L. Nelson, Selecting the best system: selecting the best system: theory and methods, Proceedings of the 35th conference on Winter simulation: driving innovation, December 07-10, 2003, New Orleans, Louisiana
• 11: Lee, L. H., Chew, E. P., Teng, S. Y. and Goldsman, D. (2006). Optimal computing budget allocation for multi-objective simulation models. Submitted to IIE Transactions.
• 12: Barry L. Nelson , Julie Swann , David Goldsman , Wheyming Song, Simple Procedures for Selecting the Best Simulated System When the Number of Alternatives is Large, Operations Research, v.49 n.6, p.950-963, November 2001 [doi>10.1287/opre.49.6.950.10019]
• 13: Rinott, Y. (1978) On two-stage selection procedures and related probability-inequalities. Communications in Statistics, A7 (8), 799--811.
• 14: James R. Swisher , Sheldon H. Jacobson , Enver Yücesan, Discrete-event simulation optimization using ranking, selection, and multiple comparison procedures: A survey, ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation (TOMACS), v.13 n.2, p.134-154, April 2003 [doi>10.1145/858481.858484]