Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Classic Assumptions Versus Simulation Practice

  • Chapter
Design and Analysis of Simulation Experiments

Part of the book series: International Series in Operations Research & Management Science ((ISOR,volume 230))

  • 3193 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter is organized as follows. Section 3.1 summarizes the classic assumptions of regression analysis, which were given in the preceding chapter. Section 3.2 discusses multiple simulation outputs (responses, performance measures), which are usual in simulation practice. Section 3.3 addresses possible nonnormality of either the simulation output itself or the regression residuals (fitting errors), including tests of normality, normalizing transformations of the simulation output, and jackknifing and bootstrapping of nonnormal output. Section 3.4 covers variance heterogeneity of the simulation output, which is usual in random simulation. Section 3.5 discusses cross-correlated simulation outputs created through common random numbers (CRN); the use of CRN is popular in random simulation. Section 3.6 discusses the validation of estimated regression models, including the coefficient of determination R 2 and the adjusted coefficient \(R_{\mbox{ adj}}^{2}\), and cross-validation; this section also discusses how classic low-order polynomial metamodels (detailed in the preceding chapter) may be improved in practice. Section 3.7 summarizes the major conclusions of this chapter. The chapter ends with solutions for the exercises, and a long list with references for further study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alba Fernández MV, Jiménez Gamero MD, Castillo Gutiérrez S (2014) Approximating a class of goodness-of-fit test statistics. Math Comput Simul 102:24–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arcones MA, Wang Y (2006) Some new tests for normality based on U-processes. Stat Probab Lett 76(1):69–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arnold SF (1981) The theory of linear models and multivariate analysis. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson A, Riani M (2000) Robust diagnostic regression analysis. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ayanso A, Diaby M, Nair SK (2006) Inventory rationing via drop-shipping in Internet retailing: a sensitivity analysis. Eur J Oper Res 171(1):135–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bekki JM, Fowler JW, Mackulak GT, Kulahci M (2009) Simulation-based cycle-time quantile estimation in manufacturing settings employing non-FIFO dispatching policies. J Simul 3(2):69–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Billingsley P (1968) Convergence of probability measures. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Bischl B, Mersmann O, Trautmann H, Weihs C (2012) Resampling methods for meta-model validation with recommendations for evolutionary computation. Evol Comput 20(2):249–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brantley MW, Lee LH, Chen C-H, Xu J (2014) An efficient simulation budget allocation method incorporating regression for partitioned domains. Automatica 50(5):1391–1400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breukers A (2006) Bio-economic modelling of brown rot in the Dutch potato production chain. Doctoral dissertation, Wageningen University, Wageningen

    Google Scholar 

  • Ceranka B, Graczyk M, Katulska K (2006) A-optimal chemical balance weighing design with nonhomogeneity of variances of errors. Stat Probab Lett 76(7):653–665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang C-H, Pal N, Lim WK, Lin J-J (2010) Comparing several population means: a parametric bootstrap method, and its comparison with usual ANOVA F test as well as ANOM. Comput Stat 25:71–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen EJ (2008) Some procedures of selecting the best designs with respect to quantile. Simulation 84:275–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen Y, Yu J (2015) Optimal jackknife for unit root models. Stat Probab Lett 99:135–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng RCH (2006a) Validating and comparing simulation models using resampling. J Simul 1:53–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng RCH (2006b) Resampling methods. In: Henderson SG, Nelson BL (eds) Handbooks in operations research and management science, vol 13. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 415–453

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng RCH, Kleijnen JPC (1999) Improved design of queueing simulation experiments with highly heteroscedastic responses. Oper Res 47(5):762–777

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng RCH, Kleijnen JPC, Melas VB (2000) Optimal design of experiments with simulation models of nearly saturated queues. J Stat Plan Inference 85(1–2):19–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chernick MR (2007) Bootstrap methods; a practitioner’s guide, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Chih M (2013) A more accurate second-order polynomial metamodel using a pseudo-random number assignment strategy. J Oper Res Soc 64:198–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho K, Loh W-Y (2006) Bias and convergence rate of the coverage probability of prediction intervals in Box-Cox transformed linear models. J Stat Plan Inference 136(10):3614–3624

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conover WJ (1999) Practical nonparametric statistics, 3rd edn. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Conover WJ, Iman RL (1981) Rank transformations as a bridge between parametric and nonparametric statistics. Am Stat 35(3):124–133

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson R, MacKinnon JG (2007) Improving the reliability of bootstrap tests with the fast double bootstrap. Comput Stat Data Anal 51(7):3259–3281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davison AC, Hinkley DV (1997) Bootstrap methods and their application. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Döhler S (2014) A sufficient criterion for control of some generalized error rates in multiple testing. Stat Probab Lett 92:114–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Draper NR, Smith H (1981) Applied regression analysis, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Dykstra RL (1970) Establishing the positive definiteness of the sample covariance matrix. Ann Math Stat 41(6):2153–2154

    Google Scholar 

  • Efron B (1982) The jackknife, the bootstrap and other resampling plans. CBMS-NSF series. SIAM, Philadelphia

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Efron B (2011) The bootstrap and Markov chain Monte Carlo. J Biopharm Stat 21(6):1052–1062

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Efron B, Tibshirani RJ (1993) An introduction to the bootstrap. Chapman & Hall, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman J, Modarres R (2006) Inverse Box-Cox: the power-normal distribution. Stat Probab Lett 76(8):764–772

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gel YR, Miao W, Gastwirth JL (2007) Robust directed tests of normality against heavy-tailed alternatives. Comput Stat Data Anal 51:2734–2746

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghosh S, Polansky AM (2014) Smoothed and iterated bootstrap confidence regions for parameter vectors. J Multivar Anal 132:171–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert S, Zemčík P (2006) Who’s afraid of reduced-rank parameterizations of multivariate models? Theory and example. J Multivar Anal 97(4):925–945

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey LG (2006) Tests for regression models with heteroskedasticity of unknown form. Comput Stat Data Anal 50(10):2715–2733

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg PW, Williams CKI, Bishop CM (1998) Regression with input-dependent noise: a Gaussian process treatment. In: Jordan MI, Kearns MJ, Solla SA (eds) Advances in neural information processing systems, vol 10. MIT, Cambridge pp. 493–499

    Google Scholar 

  • Good PI (2005) Resampling methods: a practical guide to data analysis, 3rd edn. Birkhäuser, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon AY (2007) Unimprovability of the Bonferroni procedure in the class of general step-up multiple testing procedures. Stat Probab Lett 77(2):117–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordy MB, Juneja S (2010) Nested simulation in portfolio risk measurement. Manag Sci 56(11):1833–1848

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorissen D (2010) Grid-enabled adaptive surrogate modeling for computer aided engineering. Ph.D. dissertation Ghent University, Ghent

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamad H (2011) Validation of metamodels in simulation: a new metric. Eng Comput 27(4):309–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrell FE, Lee KL, Mark DB (1996) Tutorial in biostatistics; multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy and measuring and reducing errors. Stat Med 15:361–387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartley HO (1950) The maximum F-ratio as a short-cut test for heterogeneity of variance. Biometrika 50:187–194

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartung J, Knapp G (2010) Adaptive confidence intervals of desired length and power for normal means. J Stat Plan Inference 140:3317–3325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoad K, Robinson S, Davies R (2010) Automated selection of the number of replications for a discrete-event simulation. J Oper Res Soc 61(11):1632–1644

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong LJ (2009) Estimating quantile sensitivities. Oper Res 57(1):118–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horowitz JL (2001) The bootstrap. Volume 5 of handbook of econometrics. North Holland, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsieh K-L, Chen Y-K (2007) Bootstrap confidence interval estimates of the bullwhip effect. Simul Model Pract Theory 15(8):908–917

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Irizarry MA, Kuhl ME, Lada EK, Subramanian S, Wilson JR (2003) Analyzing transformation-based simulation metamodels. IIE Trans 35(3):271–283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ivanescu C, Bertrand W, Fransoo J, Kleijnen JPC (2006) Bootstrapping to solve the limited data problem in production control: an application in batch processing industries. J Oper Res Soc 57(1):2–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jimenez-Gamero MD, Kim H-M (2015) Fast goodness-of-fit tests based on the characteristic function. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 89:172–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jurečková J, Picek J (2007) Shapiro–Wilk-type test of normality under nuisance regression and scale. Comput Stat Data Anal 51(10):5184–5191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khuri AI, Mukhopadhyay S (2010) Response surface methodology. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Comput Stat 2:128–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim S, Alexopoulos C, Tsui K, Wilson JR (2007) Distribution-free tabular CUSUM chart for autocorrelated data. IIE Trans 39:317–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC (1983) Cross-validation using the t statistic. Eur J Oper Res 13(2):133–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC (1987) Statistical tools for simulation practitioners. Marcel Dekker, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC (1992) Regression metamodels for simulation with common random numbers: comparison of validation tests and confidence intervals. Manag Sci 38(8):1164–1185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC (1993) Simulation and optimization in production planning: a case study. Decis Support Syst 9:269–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC (1995) Sensitivity analysis and optimization of system dynamics models: regression analysis and statistical design of experiments. Syst Dyn Rev 11(4):275–288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC (2008) Design and analysis of simulation experiments. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC, Cheng RCH, Bettonvil B (2001) Validation of trace-driven simulation models: bootstrapped tests. Manag Sci 47(11):1533–1538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC, Cremers P, van Belle F (1985) The power of weighted and ordinary least squares with estimated unequal variances in experimental designs. Commun Stat Simul Comput 14(1):85–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC, Deflandre D (2003) Statistical analysis of random simulations: bootstrap tutorial. Simul News Europe issue 38/39:29–34

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC, Deflandre D (2006) Validation of regression metamodels in simulation: bootstrap approach. Eur J Oper Res 170(1):120–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC, Helton JC (1999) Statistical analyses of scatter plots to identify important factors in large-scale simulations, 1: review and comparison of techniques. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 65(2):147–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC, Karremans PCA, Oortwijn WK, van Groenendaal WJH (1987) Jackknifing estimated weighted least squares: JEWLS. Commun Stat Theory Methods 16(3):747–764

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC, Kriens J, Timmermans H, Van den Wildenberg H (1989) Regression sampling in statistical auditing: a practical survey and evaluation (including rejoinder). Statistica Neerlandica 43(4):193–207 (p 225)

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC, Pierreval H, Zhang J (2011) Methodology for determining the acceptability of system designs in uncertain environments. Eur J Oper Res 209(2):176–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC, Sargent RG (2000) A methodology for the fitting and validation of metamodels in simulation. Eur J Oper Res 120(1):14–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC, Standridge C (1988) Experimental design and regression analysis: an FMS case study. Eur J Oper Res 33(3):257–261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC, Van Beers WCM (2013) Monotonicity-preserving bootstrapped Kriging metamodels for expensive simulations. J Oper Res Soc 64(5):708–717

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC, Van Beers WCM, Van Nieuwenhuyse I (2010) Constrained optimization in simulation: a novel approach. Eur J Oper Res 202(1):164–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC, Van Groenendaal W (1992) Simulation: a statistical perspective. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC, Van Groenendaal W (1995) Two-stage versus sequential sample-size determination in regression analysis of simulation experiments. Am J Math Manag Sci 15(1&2):83–114

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC, Van Ham G, Rotmans J (1992) Techniques for sensitivity analysis of simulation models: a case study of the CO2 greenhouse effect. Simulation 58(6):410–417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kreiss J-P, Paparoditis E (2011) Bootstrap methods for dependent data: a review (with discussion). J Korean Stat Soc 40:357–395

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lahiri SN (2003) Resampling methods for dependent data. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Law AM (2015) Simulation modeling and analysis, 5th edn. McGraw-Hill, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann EL (1999) Elements of large-sample theory. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lin Y, Mistree F, Tsui K-L, Allen JK (2002) Metamodel validation with deterministic computer experiments. In: 9th AIAA/ISSMO symposium on multidisciplinary analysis and optimization, Atlanta, 4–6 Sept 2002, Paper Number AIAA-2002-5425

    Google Scholar 

  • Lunneborg CE (2000) Data analysis by resampling: concepts and applications. Duxbury Press, Pacific Grove

    Google Scholar 

  • Mammen E, Nandi S (2012) Bootstrap and resampling. In: Gentle JE, Haerdle W, Mori Y (eds) Handbook of computational statistics, vol 1. Concepts and fundamentals, 2nd edn. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 499–527

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mandel M, Betensky RA (2008) Simultaneous confidence intervals based on the percentile bootstrap approach. Comput Stat Data Anal 52:2158–2165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markiewicz A, Szczepańska A (2007) Optimal designs in multivariate linear models. Stat Probab Lett 77:426–430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin MA (2007) Bootstrap hypothesis testing for some common statistical problems: a critical evaluation of size and power properties Comput Stat Data Anal 51(12):6321–6342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez-Camblor P, Corral N (2012) A general bootstrap algorithm for hypothesis testing. J Stat Plan Inference 142(2):589–600

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller AJ (1990) Subset selection in regression. Chapman and Hall, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Miller RG (1974) The jackknife—a review. Biometrika 61:1–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Montevechi JAB, de Almeida Filho RG, Paiva AP, Costa RFS, Medeiros AL (2010) Sensitivity analysis in discrete-event simulation using fractional factorial designs. J Simul 4(2):128–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narula SC, Wellington JF (2007) Multiple criteria linear regression. Eur J Oper Res 181(2):767–772

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noguera JH, Watson EF (2006) Response surface analysis of a multi-product batch processing facility using a simulation metamodel. Int J Prod Econ 102(2):333–343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Novikov I, Oberman B (2007) Optimization of large simulations using statistical software. Comput Stat Data Anal 51(5):2747–2752

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pasupathy R, Hunter SR, Pujowidianto NA, Lee LH, Chen C-H (2014) Stochastically constrained ranking and selection via SCORE. ACMTrans Model Comput Simul 25(1):1:1–1:26

    Google Scholar 

  • Paparoditis E, Politis DN (2005) Bootstrap hypothesis testing in regression models. Stat Probab Lett 74:356–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park DS, Kim YB, Shin KI, Willemain TR (2001) Simulation output analysis using the threshold bootstrap. Eur J Oper Res 134:17–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pérez-Cruzado C, Fehrmann L, Magdon P, Cañellas I, Sixto H, Kleinn C (2015) On the site-level suitability of biomass models. Environ Model Softw 73:14–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Press WH, Teukolsky SA, Vetterling WT, Flannery BP (2007) Numerical recipes: the art of scientific computing, third edition. Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Psaradakis Z (2006) Blockwise bootstrap testing for stationarity. Stat Probab Lett 76(6):562–570

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Racine JS, MacKinnon JG (2007) Inference via kernel smoothing of bootstrap values P values. Comput Stat Data Anal 51(12):5949–5957

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao CR (1959) Some problems involving linear hypothesis in multivariate analysis. Biometrika 46:49–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao CR (1967) Least squares theory using an estimated dispersion matrix and its application to measurement of signals. In: Proceedings of the fifth Berkeley symposium on mathematical statistics and probability, Berkeley, vol I, pp 355–372

    Google Scholar 

  • Renaud O, Victoria-Feser M-P (2010) A robust coefficient of determination for regression. J Stat Plan Inference 140(7):1852–1862

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruud PA (2000) An introduction to classical econometric theory. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadooghi-Alvandi SM, Malekzadeh A (2014) Simultaneous confidence intervals for ratios of means of several lognormal distributions: a parametric bootstrap approach. Comput Stat Data Anal 69:133–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saltelli A, Ratto M, Tarantola S, Campolongo F (2005) Sensitivity analysis of chemical models. Chem Rev 105(7):2811–2827

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saltelli A, Sobol IM (1995) About the use of rank transformation in sensitivity analysis of model output. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 50:225–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santos MI, Santos PM (2011) Construction and validation of distribution-based regression simulation metamodels. J Oper Res Soc 62:1376–1384

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheffé H (1964) The analysis of variance, 4th printing. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Schruben LW (2010) Simulation modeling for analysis. ACM Trans Model Comput Simul 20(1):2.1–2.22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schruben LW, Margolin BH (1978) Pseudorandom number assignment in statistically designed simulation and distribution sampling experiments. J Am Stat Assoc 73(363):504–525

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shao J, Tu D (1995) The jackknife and bootstrap. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson TW, Booker AJ, Ghosh D, Giunta AA, Koch PN, Yang R-J (2004) Approximation methods in multidisciplinary analysis and optimization: a panel discussion. Struct Multidiscip Optim 27(5):302–313

    Google Scholar 

  • Song WT, Chiu W (2007) A five-class variance swapping rule for simulation experiments: a correlated-blocks design. IIE Trans 39:713–722

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spöck G, Pilz J (2015) Incorporating covariance estimation uncertainty in spatial sampling design for prediction with trans-Gaussian random fields. Front Environ Sci 3(39):1–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone M (1974) Cross-validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions. J R Stat Soc Ser B 36(2):111–147

    Google Scholar 

  • Strang KD (2012) Importance of verifying queue model assumptions before planning with simulation software. Eur J Oper Res 218(2):493–504

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun Y, Wong ACM (2007) Interval estimation for the normal correlation coefficient. Stat Probab Lett 77(17):1652–1661

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan MHY (2015) Monotonic quantile regression with Bernstein polynomials for stochastic simulation. Technometrics, (in press)

    Google Scholar 

  • Tofallis C (2008) Selecting the best statistical distribution using multiple criteria. Comput Ind Eng 54(3):690–694

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tofallis C (2015) A better measure of relative prediction accuracy for model selection and model estimation. J Oper Res Soc 66:524

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner AJ, Balestrini-Robinson S, Mavris D (2013) Heuristics for the regression of stochastic simulations. J Simul 7:229–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Groenendaal WJH (1998) The economic appraisal of natural gas projects. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Viana FAC, Simpson TW, Balabanov V, Toropov V (2014) Metamodeling in multidisciplinary design optimization: how far have we really come? AIAA J 52(4):670–690

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vonk Noordegraaf A (2002) Simulation modelling to support national policy making in the control of bovine herpes virus. Doctoral dissertation, Wageningen University, Wageningen

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang B, Mishra SN, Mulekar MS, Mishra N, Huang K (2010) Comparison of bootstrap and generalized bootstrap methods for estimating high quantiles. J Stat Plan Inference 140(10):2926–2935

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang Y (2013) On efficiency properties of an R-square coefficient based on final prediction error. Stat Probab Lett 83(10):2276–2281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wen M-J, Chen S-Y, Chen HJ (2007) On testing a subset of regression parameters under heteroskedasticity. Comput Stat Data Anal 51(12):5958–5976

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu J, Zhang S, Huang E, Chen C-H, Lee H, Celik N (2014) Efficient multi-fidelity simulation optimization. In: Tolk A, Diallo SY, Ryzhov IO, Yilmaz L, Buckley S, Miller JA (eds) Proceedings of the 2014 winter simulation conference, pp 3940–3951

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang F, Ankenman B, Nelson B (2007) Efficient generation of cycle time-throughput curves through simulation and metamodeling. Nav Res Logist 54:78–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeo I-K, Johnson R (2000) A new family of power transformations to improve normality or symmetry. Biometrika 87:954–959

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • You J, Chen G (2006) Wild bootstrap estimation in partially linear models with heteroscedasticity. Stat Probab Lett 76(4):340–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands

    Jack P. C. Kleijnen

Authors
  1. Jack P. C. Kleijnen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kleijnen, J.P.C. (2015). Classic Assumptions Versus Simulation Practice. In: Design and Analysis of Simulation Experiments. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol 230. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18087-8_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation