Validation in Simulation: Various Positions in the Philosophy of Science

George B. Kleindorfer, Liam O'Neill and Ram Ganeshan
Additional contact information
George B. Kleindorfer: 303 Beam Building, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802-1913
Liam O'Neill: Health Management and Policy, 2700 Steindler Building, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242-1008
Ram Ganeshan: QAOM Department, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio 45221-0130

Management Science, 1998, vol. 44, issue 8, 1087-1099

Abstract: There is still considerable doubt and even anxiety among simulation modelers as to what the methodologically correct guidelines or procedures for validating simulation models should be. Epistemically, the approaches one finds in the simulation literature run the gamut from objectivist to relativist with shades in between. At present in the philosophy of science, there appears to be a convergence toward a nonalgorithmic but discursive and nonrelativistic view of the argumentation involved in warranting scientific theorizing. The present paper attempts to give a description of the various philosophical positions as well as to summarize their problems and the kinds of evidentiary arguments they would each allow in arriving at defensible simulation models. From the debate, we attempt to set out a perspective that frees the practioner to pursue a varied set of approaches to validation with a diminished burden of methodological anxiety. Reciprocally this perspective does not let the modeler off of the hook but rather converts the validation problem into an ethical problem in which the practitioner must responsibly and professionally argue for the warrant of the model.

Keywords: Simulation; Validation; Philosophy of Science; Hermeneutics (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 1998
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (29)

Downloads: (external link)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.44.8.1087 (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:44:y:1998:i:8:p:1087-1099

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Management Science from INFORMS Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Asher ().