澳大利亚国防环境下模型和模拟的验证、验证和认证:综述

Kerryn R. Owen, R. Chakrabortty
{"title":"澳大利亚国防环境下模型和模拟的验证、验证和认证:综述","authors":"Kerryn R. Owen, R. Chakrabortty","doi":"10.1177/15485129221134632","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Building simulation models that are valid and credible is an enduring challenge in the Australian Defence Organisation (ADO) context. Establishing validity and credibility can be achieved through the rigorous use of appropriate Verification, Validation, and Accreditation (VVA) processes. Such processes are well-known in modeling and simulation (M&S) practice. However, these are generally not applied within the ADO, typically due to resourcing concerns and a lack of authoritative guidance. Even if there are any, due to security concerns and commercial reasons, the application of M&S within ADO is generally not published in open-access platforms. Depending on where in the M&S life-cycle VVA is started, it may also serve a secondary aim of risk reduction, assisting in the early discovery of possible problems or mistakes. This research reviews current VVA practices from academic literature and recommends processes that are appropriate for application to combat simulation tools within the ADO context. A scoping review has been conducted to gather insight into current VVA practice in the M&S community. The results of this review are presented in the form of charting relevant characteristics from selected references. The scoping review shows that executable validation of simulation results against referent data sourced from physical experiments is the most prevalent form of VVA, with referent data from comparative models being a prevalent alternative. Furthermore, there is evident reliance on graphical comparison of data; this could be enhanced with objective data comparators, such as aggregate error measures or statistical techniques. Finally, there is an evident gap in VVA references from Australia, which could be addressed through the propagation and reporting of prevalent VVA practices within the ADO context.","PeriodicalId":44661,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation-Applications Methodology Technology-JDMS","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Verification, validation, and accreditation for models and simulations in the Australian defence context: a review\",\"authors\":\"Kerryn R. Owen, R. Chakrabortty\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15485129221134632\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Building simulation models that are valid and credible is an enduring challenge in the Australian Defence Organisation (ADO) context. Establishing validity and credibility can be achieved through the rigorous use of appropriate Verification, Validation, and Accreditation (VVA) processes. Such processes are well-known in modeling and simulation (M&S) practice. However, these are generally not applied within the ADO, typically due to resourcing concerns and a lack of authoritative guidance. Even if there are any, due to security concerns and commercial reasons, the application of M&S within ADO is generally not published in open-access platforms. Depending on where in the M&S life-cycle VVA is started, it may also serve a secondary aim of risk reduction, assisting in the early discovery of possible problems or mistakes. This research reviews current VVA practices from academic literature and recommends processes that are appropriate for application to combat simulation tools within the ADO context. A scoping review has been conducted to gather insight into current VVA practice in the M&S community. The results of this review are presented in the form of charting relevant characteristics from selected references. The scoping review shows that executable validation of simulation results against referent data sourced from physical experiments is the most prevalent form of VVA, with referent data from comparative models being a prevalent alternative. Furthermore, there is evident reliance on graphical comparison of data; this could be enhanced with objective data comparators, such as aggregate error measures or statistical techniques. Finally, there is an evident gap in VVA references from Australia, which could be addressed through the propagation and reporting of prevalent VVA practices within the ADO context.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44661,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation-Applications Methodology Technology-JDMS\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation-Applications Methodology Technology-JDMS\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15485129221134632\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation-Applications Methodology Technology-JDMS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15485129221134632","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在澳大利亚国防组织(ADO)的背景下,建立有效和可信的仿真模型是一个持久的挑战。建立有效性和可信性可以通过严格使用适当的验证、确认和认可(VVA)过程来实现。这样的过程在建模和仿真(M&S)实践中是众所周知的。然而,这些通常不会在ADO内应用,这通常是由于资源问题和缺乏权威指导。即使有,出于安全考虑和商业原因,ADO内的M&S应用一般不会在开放访问平台上发布。根据玛莎百货生命周期中VVA的启动位置,它也可能服务于降低风险的次要目标,帮助早期发现可能的问题或错误。本研究从学术文献中回顾了当前的VVA实践,并推荐了适合于ADO上下文中战斗模拟工具应用的过程。已经进行了范围审查,以收集对M&S社区当前VVA实践的见解。本综述的结果以图表的形式从选定的参考文献的相关特征。范围审查表明,根据来自物理实验的参考数据对仿真结果进行可执行验证是VVA最普遍的形式,来自比较模型的参考数据是一种普遍的替代方案。此外,显然依赖于数据的图形比较;这可以用客观数据比较器来加强,例如汇总误差测量或统计技术。最后,来自澳大利亚的VVA参考存在明显的差距,这可以通过在ADO上下文中传播和报告流行的VVA实践来解决。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Verification, validation, and accreditation for models and simulations in the Australian defence context: a review
Building simulation models that are valid and credible is an enduring challenge in the Australian Defence Organisation (ADO) context. Establishing validity and credibility can be achieved through the rigorous use of appropriate Verification, Validation, and Accreditation (VVA) processes. Such processes are well-known in modeling and simulation (M&S) practice. However, these are generally not applied within the ADO, typically due to resourcing concerns and a lack of authoritative guidance. Even if there are any, due to security concerns and commercial reasons, the application of M&S within ADO is generally not published in open-access platforms. Depending on where in the M&S life-cycle VVA is started, it may also serve a secondary aim of risk reduction, assisting in the early discovery of possible problems or mistakes. This research reviews current VVA practices from academic literature and recommends processes that are appropriate for application to combat simulation tools within the ADO context. A scoping review has been conducted to gather insight into current VVA practice in the M&S community. The results of this review are presented in the form of charting relevant characteristics from selected references. The scoping review shows that executable validation of simulation results against referent data sourced from physical experiments is the most prevalent form of VVA, with referent data from comparative models being a prevalent alternative. Furthermore, there is evident reliance on graphical comparison of data; this could be enhanced with objective data comparators, such as aggregate error measures or statistical techniques. Finally, there is an evident gap in VVA references from Australia, which could be addressed through the propagation and reporting of prevalent VVA practices within the ADO context.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
12.50%
发文量
40
期刊最新文献
Modeling fog and friction in military enterprise Adapting military doctrine in the shadow of the future Modeling of Russian–Ukrainian war based on fuzzy cognitive map with genetic tuning Decision-making in the shadow of strategic competition costs Multiple UAVs on a shared tether: Use cases, modeling, and probabilistic path planning
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1