Credible baseline analysis for multi-model public policy studies

  • S. I. Gass
  • S. C. Parikh
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Control and Information Sciences book series (LNCIS, volume 35)


The nature of public decision-making and resource allocation is such that many complex interactions can best be examined and understood by quantitative analysis. Most organizations do not possess the totality of models and needed analytical skills to perform detailed and systematic quantitative analysis. Hence, the need for coordinated, multi-organization studies that support public decision-making has grown in recent years. This trend is expected not only to continue, but to increase.

This paper describes the authors' views on the process of multi-model analysis based on their participation in an analytical exercise, the ORNL/MITRE Study. One of the authors was the exercise coordinator. During the study, the authors were concerned with the issue of measuring and conveying credibility of the analysis. This work led them to identify several key determinants, described in this paper, that could be used to develop a rating of credibility.


Policy Option Baseline Scenario Fuel Price Baseline Analysis Energy Information Administration 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Brewer, G. and M. Shubik, The War Game, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1979.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brewer, G., "Scientific Gaming: The Development and Use of Free-Form Scenarios", Simulation and Games, Vol. 9, September 1978.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Council on Environmental Quality and the Department of State, The Global 2000 Report to the President, 1980.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    deLeon, P., "Scenario Designs: An Overview", Simulation and Games, Vol. 6, No. 1, March 1975.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    DeWeerd, H.A., "A Contextual Approach to Scenario Construction", Simulation and Games, Vol. 5, No. 4, December 1974.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Energy Information Administration, Annual Report to Congress, Department of Energy, Washington, D.C., 1978.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Energy Information Administration, "Model Documentation Reports" and "Analysis Documentation Reports", Memorandum, from George Lady and Susan Shaw to the DOE Applied Analysis Senior Staff, February 6, 1980.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Energy Modeling Forum, Coal in Transition: 1980–2000, Vol. 3, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, September 1978.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jack Faucett Assoc., "TEC: Transportation Energy Conservation Model", JACKFAU-78-159-2, submitted to division of Transportation Energy Conservation, Department of Energy, August 1978, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gass, Saul, I., "Computer Model Documentation: A Review and an Approach", NBS Special Publication 500-39, Washington, D.C., February 1979.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gass, Paul, I., et al., "Interim Report on Model Assessment Methodology: Documentation Assessment", Operations Research Division, NBS, Washington, D.C., January 1980.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gass, Saul, I. (Editor), Validation and Assessment of Energy Models, NBS Special Publication 569, U.S. Government Printing Office, Stock No. 003-003-02155-5, Washington, D.C., 1980.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gass, Saul I. and Lambert Joel, "Model Confidence". Operations Research Dividion, NBS, Washington, D.C. June 1980.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gass, Saul I. and B.W. Thompson, "Guidelines for Model Evaluation: An Abridged Version of the U.S. General Accounting Office Exposure Draft", Operations Research, Vol. 28, No. 2, March–April 1980.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Greene, D.L., and A.B. Rose, "ORNL Highway Gasoline Demand Model Documentation", Model Overview (Volume I) and User's Guide (Volume II) Energy Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge (draft), 1980.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Groncki, P., et al., "Conservation and Solar Alternative Planning Case: Energy/Economy Projection", Brookhaven National Laboratory, April 3, 1980.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hirst, E. and J. Carney, "The ORNL Engineering-Economic Model of Residential Energy Use", ORNL/CON-24, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, July 1978.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jackson, J.R., S. Cohn, J. Cope, and W.S. Johnson, "The Commercial Demand for Energy: A Disaggregated Approach", ORNL/CON-15, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, April 1978.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lady, G.M., "Model Assessment and Validation", pp. 5–22 in (24).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Miller, G.G., et al., "SPURR Model Capabilities", in (8).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    National Bureau of Standards, "Guidelines for Documentation of Computer Programs and Automated Data Systems", FIPS PUB 38, Washington, D.C. February 15, 1978.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Oppenheim, M., Applied Models in Urban and Regional Analysis, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliff, N.J., 1980.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Parikh, S.C., "Appropriate Assessment" in (12), 1980.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Parikh, S.C. (Coordinator), "Energy Saving Impacts of DOE's Conservation and Solar Programs", Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, April 1981.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Reister, D., R. Barnes, and J. Edmonds, "Oak Ridge Industrial Model", Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, July 1980 (draft).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. I. Gass
    • 1
    • 2
  • S. C. Parikh
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.College of Business and ManagementUniversity of MarylandCollege Park
  2. 2.Energy DivisionOak Ridge National LaboratoryOak Ridge

Personalised recommendations