Summary
Decision makers and other users of models are interested in model validity. From their viewpoint the important model inputs should be split into two groups, namely inputs that are under the decision makers’ control versus (environmental) inputs that are not controllable. Specifically, users want to ask ’what if’ questions about global (not local) sensitivities: what happens if controllable inputs are changed (scenario analysis), what if model parameters and structure change? Among the techniques to answer these questions are statistical design of experiments (such as fractional factorial designs) and regression analysis. These techniques may show that some non-controllable inputs of the model are important; yet these inputs may not be known precisely. Then risk or uncertainty analysis becomes relevant. Its techniques are Monte Carlo sampling, including variance reduction techniques (such as Latin hypercube sampling), possibly combined with regression analysis. Controllable inputs can be optimized through Response Surface Methodology (RSM).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Balson W.E., Welsh J.L., and Wilson D.S. (1992), ’Using decision analysis and risk analysis to manage utility environmental risk’. Interfaces, 22 (6), 126–139.
Banks J. (1989), ’Testing, understanding and validating complex simulation models’, Proceedings of the 1989 Winter Simulation Conference.
Barlas Y. (1989), ’Multiple tests for validation of system dynamics type of simulation models’, European Journal of Operational Research, 42 (1), pp. 59–87.
Barton R. (1992), ’Metamodels for simulation input-output relations’. 1992 Winter Simulation Conference Proceedings, Association for Computing Machinery, New York.
Beckman R.J. and McKay M.D. (1987), ’Monte Carlo estimation under different distributions using the same simulation’. Technometrics, 29 (2), 153–160.
Bettonvil, B. and Kleijnen, J.P.C. (1991), ’Identifying the important factors in simulation models with many factors’. Tilburg University.
Cressie N.A.C. (1991), Statistics for spatial data. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Downing D.J., Gardner R.H., and Hoffman F.O. (1985), ’An examination of response-surface methodologies for uncertainty analysis in assessment models’. Technometrics, 27, 151–163.
Downing D.J., Gardner R.H., and Hoffman F.O. (1986), ’Response to Robert G. Easterling’. Technometrics, 28 (1), 92–93.
Easterling, R.G. (1986), ’Discussion of Downing, Gardner, and Hoffman (1985)’. Technometrics, 28 (1), 91–92.
Engemann K.J and Miller H.E. (1992), ’Operations risk management at a major bank’. Interfaces, 22 (6), 140–149.
FIPS (1979), Guidelines for automatic data processing risk analysis. FIPS PUB 65 ( Federal Information Processing Standards Publication ), Washington.
Harbers A. (1993), Onzekerheidsanalyse op een simulatiemodel voor het broeikaseffect. (Uncertainty analysis of a simulation model for the greenhouse effect.) Tilburg University.
Helton J.C., Garner J.W., McCurley R.D. and Rudeen D.K. (1991), Sensitivity analysis techniques and results for performance assessment at the waste isolation pilot plant. Sandia Report, SAND90–7103.
Helton J.C., Garner J.W., Rechard R.P., Rudeen D.K., and Swift P.N. (1992), Preliminary comparison with 40 CFR part 191, subpart B for the waste isolation pilot plant, vol. 4: uncertainty and sensitivity analysis. Sandia Report, SAND91–0893/4.
Hertz D.B. (1964), ’Risk analysis in capital investments’. Harvard Business Review, 95–106.
Iman, R.L. and Conover W.J. (1980), ’Small sample sensitivity analysis techniques for computer models, with an application to risk assessment’. (Including comments and rejoinder). Communications in Statistics, A9, no. 17, 1749–1874.
Janssen, P.H.M., P.S.C. Heuberger, and R. Sanders (1992), UNCSAM 1.0: a software package for sensitivity and uncertainty analysis manual. National Institute of Public Health and Environmental Protection, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Kleijnen, J.P.C. (1983), ’Risk analysis and sensitivity analysis: antithesis or synthesis?’ Simuletter, 14 (1–4), 64–72.
Kleijnen J.P.C. (1987), Statistical Tools for Simulation Practitioners. Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York.
Kleijnen J.P.C. (1993), ’Verification and validation of simulation models’. European Journal of Operational Research (accepted).
Kleijnen, J.P.C. and Alink, G.A. (1992), ’Validation of simulation models: Mine-hunting case study’. Tilburg University.
Kleijnen J.P.C. and W. Van Groenendaal (1992), Simulation: a Statistical Perspective. Wiley, Chichester.
Kleijnen, J.P.C., Rotmans, J. and Van Ham, G. (1992), ’Techniques for sensitivity analysis of simulation models: a case study of the CO2 greenhouse effect’. Simulation, 58 (6), 410–417.
Krumm, F.V. and Rolle, C.F. (1992), ’Management and application of decision and risk analysis in Du Pont’. Interfaces, 22 (6), 84–93.
McKay M.D. (1992), ’Latin hypercube sampling as a tool in uncertainty analysis of computer models’. 1992 Winter Simulation Conference Proceedings, Association for Computing Machinery, New York.
Olivi L. (1980), Response surface methodology in risk analysis; synthesis and analysis methods for safety and reliability studies. Edited by G. Apostolakis, S. Garibra and G. Volta, Plenum Publishing Corporation, New York.
Pacheco, N.S. (1988), ’Session HI: simulation certification, verification and validation’, SDI Testing: the Road to Success; 1988 Symposium Proceedings International Test & Evaluation Association, ITEA, Fairfax (Virginia 22033 ).
Reilly J.M., Edmonds J.A., Gardner R.H., and Brenkert A.L. (1987), ’Uncertainty analysis of the IEA/GRAU CO, emissions model’. The Energy Journal, 8 (3), 1–29.
Sacks J., Welch W.J., Mitchell T.J., and Wynn H.R. (1989), ’Design and analysis of computer experiments (includes comments and rejoinder)’. Statistical Science, 4(4), 409–431.
Saltelli A., T.H. Andres, and Homma T. (1993), ’Sensitivity analysis of model output: an investigation of new techniques’. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 15, 21 12–38.
Saltelli A. and Homma T. (1992), ’Sensitivity analysis for model output: performance of black box techniques on three international benchmark exercises’. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 13, 73–94.
Zeigler, B. (1976), Theory of Modelling and Simulation. Wiley Interscience, New York.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1994 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kleijnen, J.P.C. (1994). Sensitivity Analysis Versus Uncertainty Analysis: When to Use What?. In: Grasman, J., van Straten, G. (eds) Predictability and Nonlinear Modelling in Natural Sciences and Economics. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-0962-8_27
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-0962-8_27
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-4416-5
Online ISBN: 978-94-011-0962-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive