Cheap Fidelity before Expensive Plan Verification
Abstract
Multifidelity charging design and surrogate beam search both substitute inexpensive representations for some costly evaluations. The shared test examines discrepancy where the representations select an extreme. Independent high-quality checks belong in the budget. Savings need to preserve each application's mechanism and cannot be inferred from parameter or run counts alone. This focused synthesis develops an empirical comparison that preserves the terminal action, observation process, and total verification cost. Its proposed tests are prospective; no new simulation run, model-training result, or intervention effect is reported.
References
- J. Li, J. Du, S. Gao, Q. Ye, and G. Jiang, “Enhancing Electric Vehicle Charging Station Design Using Multi-Fidelity Simulations,” Production and Operations Management, in press.
- H. H. Zhang, S. Gao, W. Chen, L. Shi, W. D. D’Souza, and R. R. Meyer, “A Surrogate-Based Metaheuristic Global Search Method for Beam Angle Selection in Radiation Treatment Planning,” Physics in Medicine and Biology, vol. 58, pp. 1933–1946, 2013.
- Chick, Stephen E., and Koichiro Inoue. “New Two-Stage and Sequential Procedures for Selecting the Best Simulated System.” Operations Research, vol. 49, no. 5, 2001, pp. 732–743. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.49.5.732.10615.
- Frazier, Peter I., Warren B. Powell, and Savas Dayanik. “A Knowledge-Gradient Policy for Sequential Information Collection.” SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization, vol. 47, no. 5, 2008, pp. 2410–2439. https://doi.org/10.1137/070693424.
- Rasmussen, Carl Edward, and Christopher K. I. Williams. Gaussian Processes for Machine Learning. MIT Press, 2006. https://gaussianprocess.org/gpml/.
- Sacks, Jerome, William J. Welch, Toby J. Mitchell, and Henry P. Wynn. “Design and Analysis of Computer Experiments.” Statistical Science, vol. 4, no. 4, 1989, pp. 409–423. https://doi.org/10.1214/ss/1177012413.
- Bertsimas, Dimitris, and Melvyn Sim. “The Price of Robustness.” Operations Research, vol. 52, no. 1, 2004, pp. 35–53. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.1030.0065.
- Campi, Marco C., and Simone Garatti. “The Exact Feasibility of Randomized Solutions of Uncertain Convex Programs.” SIAM Journal on Optimization, vol. 19, no. 3, 2008, pp. 1211–1230. https://doi.org/10.1137/07069821X.
- Glasserman, Paul. Monte Carlo Methods in Financial Engineering. Springer, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-21617-1.
- Ankenman, Bruce, Barry L. Nelson, and Jeremy Staum. “Stochastic Kriging for Simulation Metamodeling.” Operations Research, vol. 58, no. 2, 2010, pp. 371–382. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.1090.0754.