SimScience 2017: Simulation Science pp 208-218 | Cite as

Learning State Mappings in Multi-Level-Simulation

  • Stefan WittekEmail author
  • Andreas Rausch
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 889)


Holistic simulation aids the engineering of cyber physical systems. However, its complexity makes it expensive regarding computation time and modeling effort. We introduce multi-level-simulation (Our Multi-Level-Simulation approach was already published in [1]. The description of our approach in this paper is based on this publication and updates it. This description is the context to the results on learning State mappings within Multi-Level-Simulations presented in this paper.) as a methodology to handle this complexity. In this methodology, the required holistic perspective is reached on a coarse level, which is linked with multiple detailed models of small sections of the system. In order to co-simulate the levels, mappings between their states are required. This paper gives an insight into the current state of progress of using well known machine learning techniques for regression to generate these mappings using small sets of labeled training data.


Co-simulation Multi-level-simulation Machine learning Regression 



We thank the Simulationswissenschaftliches Zentrum Clausthal-Göttingen (SWZ) for financial support.


  1. 1.
    Wittek, S.H.A., Göttsche, M., Rausch, A., Grabowski, J.: Towards multi-level-simulation using dynamic cloud environments. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Simulation and Modeling Methodologies, Technologies and Applications, pp. 297–303 (2016).
  2. 2.
    Dahmann, J.S., Fujimoto, R.M., Weatherly, R.M.: The Department of Defense High Level Architecture (1997)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Blochwitz, T., et al.: Functional mockup interface 2.0: the standard for tool independent exchange of simulation models (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schütte, S., Scherfke, S., Tröschel, M.: Mosaik: a framework for modular simulation of active components in Smart Grids. In: 2011 IEEE First International Workshop on Smart Grid Modeling and Simulation (SGMS), pp. 55–60. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Eker, J., et al.: Taming heterogeneity-the Ptolemy approach. Proc. IEEE 91, 127–144 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dangelmaier, W., Mueck, B.: Using dynamic multiresolution modelling to analyze large material flow systems. In: Proceedings of the 36th Conference on Winter Simulation, WSC 2004. Winter Simulation Conference, Washington, D.C., pp. 1720–1727 (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Huber, D., Dangelmaier, W.: A method for simulation state mapping between discrete event material flow models of different level of detail. In: Proceedings of the Winter Simulation Conference, WSC 2011. Winter Simulation Conference, Phoenix, Arizona, pp. 2877–2886 (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Claes, R., Holvoet, T.: Multi-model traffic microsimulations. In: Winter Simulation Conference, WSC 2009. Winter Simulation Conference, Austin, Texas, pp. 1113–1123 (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rao, D.M.: Study of dynamic component substitutions. Dissertation, University of Cincinnati (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Reynolds Jr., P.F., Natrajan, A., Srinivasan, S.: Consistency maintenance in multiresolution simulation. ACM Trans. Model. Comput. Simul. 7, 368–392 (1997). Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hong, S.-Y., Kim, T.G.: Specification of multi-resolution modeling space for multi-resolution system. Simulation 89, 28–40 (2013). Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bishop, C.M.: Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning. Springer, New York (2006)zbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of InformaticsClausthal University of TechnologyClausthal-ZellerfeldGermany

Personalised recommendations