Tests of Model Behavior that can Detect Structural Flaws: Demonstration with Simulation Experiments
Tests of Model Behavior that can Detect Structural Flaws: Demonstration with Simulation Experiments
复制标题
可检测结构缺陷的模型行为测试：通过模拟实验进行演示
DOI：
10.1007/978-3-642-74946-9_24
复制
发表时间：
1989
期刊：
影响因子：
9
通讯作者：
Y. Barlas
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Y. Barlas
系统动力学（SD）模型的验证包括两类测试：模型结构测试和模型行为测试。然而，由于SD模型是因果模型，模型有效性的本质始终在于结构有效性：“正确的行为是出于正确的原因”。(The SD模型有效性的本质已经在各种SD文献中讨论过。例如，Forrester 1961（第13章）; Forrester 1968; Forrester和Senge 1980; Bell和Senge 1980; Richardson和Pugh 1981（第5和6章）以及Barlas 1985）。标准行为测试，比较模型生成的行为与观察到的参考行为，在SD上下文中通常是“弱”的，因为它们不能将虚假行为准确性（“错误原因的正确行为”）与真实行为有效性区分开来。这种测试不提供结构信息。另一方面，结构测试是“强”测试，因为它们直接评估模型结构。但它们的主要缺点是它们是非正式的，定性的，因此难以沟通。(See Forrester和Senge 1980，Richardson和Pugh 1981（第5章）用于一些特定的行为和结构测试）。因此，似乎“第三种类型的测试”最适合SD验证目的：定量/形式行为测试，可以提供一些结构信息（“结构导向”行为测试）。有趣的是，这样的测试已经存在于SD验证“剧目”中。(For例如，“极端条件”模拟，“行为敏感性”测试，在Forrester和Senge 1980和Richardson和Pugh 1981）。但这些测试通常与所有其他行为测试一起沿着，这削弱了前者和后者之间存在的主要区别。
Validation of System Dynamics (SD) models involves two general types of tests: Tests of model structure and tests of model behavior. Yet, since SD models are causal models, the essence of model validity lies always in structural validity: “Right behavior for the right reasons”. (The nature of SD model validity has been discussed in various SD literature. For example, Forrester 1961 (Chapter 13); Forrester 1968; Forrester and Senge 1980; Bell and Senge 1980; Richardson and Pugh 1981 (Chapter 5 and 6) and Barlas 1985). Standard behavior tests, which compare the model-generated behavior to the observed reference behavior are generally “weak” in SD context, since they can not separate spurious behavior accuracy (“right behavior for the wrong reasons”) from true behavior validity. Such tests provide no structural information. Structure tests, on the other hand, are “strong” tests, since they evaluate the model structure directly. But their their major drawback is that they are informal, qualitative, hence difficult to communicate. (See Forrester and Senge 1980, and Richardson and Pugh 1981 (chapter 5) for some specific behavior and structure tests). Thus, it seems like a “third type of test” would be most appropriate for SD validation purposes: Quantitative/formal behavior tests that can provide some structural information (“structurally-oriented” behavior tests). Interestingly, such tests already exist in the SD validation “repertoire”. (For example, “Extreme Condition” simulations, “Behavior Sensitivity” testing, in Forrester and Senge 1980 and Richardson and Pugh 1981). But these tests are usually listed along with all other behavior tests, which undermines the major difference that exists between the former and the latter.