SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Çukurova Üniversitesi Mühendislik-Mimarlik Fakültesi Dergisi / 2017 / Cilt: 32 - Sayı: 4

Analyzing Effectiveness of Warm Up Detection Methods

Isınma Periyodu Belirleme Yöntemlerinin Etkinliklerinin Analizi

NUŞİN UNCU
Pages
201–210
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The effectiveness of these methods based on convergence to the analytic solutions and CPU times are compared

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In discrete event system simulation, it is necessary to purify the system from effects of its initial conditions for unbiased estimation of performance outputs.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Particularly in non-terminating models, the period during which the system reaches the steady state, that is, the warm-up period statistics, should not be included in the calculations to remove the biased effects on the performance output values.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The effectiveness of these methods based on convergence to the analytic solutions and CPU times are compared
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

In discrete event system simulation, it is necessary to purify the system from effects of its initial conditions for unbiased estimation of performance outputs. Particularly in non-terminating models, the period during which the system reaches the steady state, that is, the warm-up period statistics, should not be included in the calculations to remove the biased effects on the performance output values. In problems which simulation and optimization methods are used together, the update of simulation parameters before each run results in variation of warm up periods. In order to decrease this variation, the online warm up determination methods are used. In this study, Welch’s Graphical method and two online warm up detection methods: Exponential Variation Rate Rule and Euclidean Distance methods are applied for M/M/1 queueing systems simulation. The effectiveness of these methods based on convergence to the analytic solutions and CPU times are compared

Özet

Kesikli olay simülasyonunda, performans çıktı değerlerinin yansız tahmini için sistemi başlangıç durumu etkilerinden arındırmak gerekmektedir. Özellikle sonlanmayan modellerde, sistemin durağan duruma ulaşana kadar geçirdiği süre yani ısınma periyodu istatistikleri, performans çıktı değerlerinin üzerindeki yanlı etkilerinin ortadan kaldırılması için hesaplamalara dâhil edilmemelidir. Simülasyon ve optimizasyon yöntemlerinin birlikte kullanıldığı problemlerde ise simülasyon parametrelerinin her koşum öncesi güncellenmesi ısınma periyodunda da değişimlere sebep olmaktadır. Bu değişimi azaltmak için, anlık ısınma periyodu belirleme yöntemleri kullanılmaktadır. Bu çalışmada, Welch Grafik yöntemi ve anlık ısınma periyodu belirleme yöntemlerinden Üstel Değişim Oranı Kuralı ve Öklid Uzaklığı yöntemleri M/M/1 kuyruk modeli için uygulanmıştır. Yöntemler etkinlikleri analitik sonuçlara yakınsama başarımları ve CPU zamanları bazında etkinlikleri karşılaştırılmıştır

🔖

Cite This Article

UNCU, N. (2017). Analyzing Effectiveness of Warm Up Detection Methods. Çukurova Üniversitesi Mühendislik-Mimarlik Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 32 - Sayı: 4, 201–210. https://ajindex.com/articles/350276

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Hoad, K., Robinson, S., Davies, R., 2008. Automating Warm-Up Length Estimation. Proceedings of Winter Simulation Conference, 532-540
  2. Oh, H., Park, K., 2006. An Effective Heuristic To Detect Warm-Up Period in Simulation Output. Proceedings of The Winter Simulation Conference, 182-188
  3. Lee, Y.H., Kyung, K-H., Jung, C-S., 1997. OnLine Determination of Steady State in Simulation Outputs, Computers& Industrial Engineering, 33, 805-808
  4. White, K.P., Jr., Cobb, M.J., Spratt, S., 2000. Comparison of Five Steady-State Truncation Heuristics for Simulation. Proceedings of the Winter Simulation Conference, 755-760
  5. Robinson, S., 2007. A Statistical Process Control Approach to Selecting A Warm-Up Period for A Discrete-Event Simulation. European Journal of Operational Research, 176, 332–346
  6. Gordon, G., 1969. System Simulation. New Jersey: Prentice- Hall
  7. Banks, J., Carson, J.S., Nelson, B.L., Nicol D.M., 2001. Discrete-Event System Simulation, 3 rd Ed. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ
  8. Wilson, J.R., Pritsker, A.A.B., 1978a. A Survey of Research on the Simulation Startup Problem, 31:55-58
  9. Gafarian, A.V., Ancker, C.J., Morisaku, T., 1978. Evaluation of Commonly used Rules for Detecting ‘Steady State’ in Computer Simulation. Naval Research Logistics Quarterly, 25: 511-529
  10. Nelson, B.L., 1992. Initial-Condition Bias. In Handbook of Industrial Engineering, 2nd Ed., Ed., G. Salvendy. Newyork: John Wiley. 11.Roth, E., Josephy, N., 1993. A Relaxation Time Heuristic for Exponential-Erlang Queueing Systems. Computers & Operations Research 20(3): 293-301. 12.Roth, E., 1994. The Relaxation Time Heuristic for the Initial Transient Problem in M/M/K Queueing Systems. European Journal of Operational Research. 72: 376-386
  11. Fishman, G.S., 2001. Discrete-Event Simulation, Modeling, Programming, and Analysis. New York: Springer- Verlag. 14.Bause, F., Eickhoff, M., 2003. Truncation Point Estimation using Multiple Replications in Parallel. In Proceedings of the 2003 Winter Simulation Conference, 414-421
  12. Sandıkçı, B., Sabuncuoğlu, İ., 2006. Analysis of the Behavior of the Transient Period in NonTerminating Simulations. European Journal of Operational Research, 173;252–267
  13. Law, A.M., 1983. Statistical Analysis of Simulation Output Data. Operations Research 31: 983-1029
  14. Pawlikowski, K., 1990, Steady-State Simulation of Queueing Processes: A Survey of Problems and Solutions. Computing Surveys, 22: 123-170
  15. Alexopoulos, C., Seilai, A.F