Simulation Credibility Evaluation Based on Multi-source Data Fusion

  • Yuchen Zhou
  • Ke Fang
  • Ping MaEmail author
  • Ming Yang
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 946)


Real-world system experiment data, similar system running data, empirical data or domain knowledge of SME (subject matter expert) can serve as observed data in credibility evaluation. It is of great significance to study how to incorporate multi-source observed data to evaluate the validity of the model. Generally, data fusion methods are categorized into original data fusion, feature level fusion, and decision level fusion. In this paper, we firstly discuss the hierarchy of multiple source data fusion in credibility evaluation. Then, a Bayesian feature fusion method and a MADM-based (multiple attribute decision making) decision fusion approach are proposed for credibility evaluation. The proposed methods are available under different data scenarios. Furthermore, two case studies are provided to examine the effectiveness of credibility evaluation methods with data fusion.


Multi-source data fusion Credibility evaluation Bayesian feature fusion Model validation 



The paper was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 61374164 and 61627810).


  1. 1.
    Min, F.Y., Yang, M., Wang, Z.C.: Knowledge-based method for the validation of complex simulation models. Simul. Model. Pract. Theory 18(5), 500–515 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Li, C.Z., Mahadevan, S.: Role of calibration, validation, and relevance in multi-level uncertainty integration. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 148, 32–43 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mullins, J., Ling, Y., Mahadevan, S., Sun, L., Strachan, A.: Separation of aleatory and epistemic uncertainty in probabilistic model validation. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 147, 49–59 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wang, Z.Q., Fu, Y., Yang, R.Y.: Model validation of dynamic engineering models under uncertainty. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2016 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, IDETC/CIE (2016)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Li, X., Chen, W., Chan, C.Y., Li, B., Song, S.H.: Multi-sensor fusion methodology for enhanced land vehicle positioning. Inf. Fusion 46, 51–62 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen, Y.M., Hsueh, C.S., Wang, C.K., Wu, T.Y.: Sensor fusion, sensitivity analysis and calibration in shooter localization systems. J. Comput. Sci. 25, 327–338 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wu, J., Su, Y.H., Cheng, Y.W., Shao, X.Y., Deng, C., Liu, C.: Multi-sensor information fusion for remaining useful life prediction of machining tools by adaptive network based fuzzy inference system. Appl. Soft Comput. 68, 13–23 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Novak, D., Riener, R.: A survey of sensor fusion methods in wearable robotics. Robot. Auton. Syst. 73, 155–170 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    William, H., Xu, X., Prasanta, K.D.: Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: a literature review. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 202, 16–24 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Li, H., Bao, Y.Q., Ou, J.P.: Structural damage identification based on integration of information fusion and Shannon entropy. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 22, 1427–1440 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ma, P., Zhou, Y.C., Shang, X.B., Yang, M.: Firing accuracy evaluation of electromagnetic railgun based on multicriteria optimal Latin hypercube design. IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. 45(7), 1503–1511 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    McNab, I.R.: Pulsed power options for large EM launchers. In: 2014 17th International Symposium on Electromagnetic Launch Technology (2014)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kheir, N.A., Holmes, W.M.: On validating simulation models of missile systems. Simulation 30(4), 117–128 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Roy, C.J., Oberkampf, W.L.: A comprehensive framework for verification, validation, and uncertainty quantification in scientific computing. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 200(25), 2131–2144 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zhou, Y.C.: Transformation methods and assistant tools from data consistency analysis result to simulation credibility. Master dissertation, Harbin Institute of Technology, China (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Harbin Institute of TechnologyHarbinChina

Personalised recommendations