Sequential Selection with Unknown Correlation Structures

References

• Arlotto A, Gans N, Chick S (2010) Optimal employee retention when inferring unknown learning curves. Johansson B, Jain S, Montoya-Torres J, Hugan J, Yücesan E, eds. Proc. 2010 Winter Simulation Conf. (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ), 1178–1188.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bechhofer RE (1954) A single-sample multiple decision procedure for ranking means of normal populations with known variances. Ann. Math. Statist. 25(1):16–39.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bechhofer RE, Santner TJ, Goldsman DM (1995) Design and Analysis of Experiments for Statistical Selection, Screening and Multiple Comparisons (John Wiley & Sons, New York).Google Scholar
• Biller B, Corlu CG (2011) Accounting for parameter uncertainty in large-scale stochastic simulations with correlated inputs. Oper. Res. 59(3):661–673.Link, Google Scholar
• Çinlar E (2011) Probability and Stochastics (Springer, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen C-H, Lee LH (2011) Stochastic Simulation Optimization: An Optimal Computing Budget Allocation, System Engineering and Operations Research, Vol. 1 (World Scientific, Singapore).Google Scholar
• Chen C-H, He D, Fu MC, Lee LH (2008) Efficient simulation budget allocation for selecting an optimal subset. INFORMS J. Comput. 20(4):579–595.Link, Google Scholar
• Cheng RCH, Currie CSM (2004) Optimization by simulation metamodelling methods. Ingalls RG, Rossetti MD, Smith JS, Peters BA, eds. Proc. 2004 Winter Simulation Conf. (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ), 485–490.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chick SE (2006) Subjective probability and Bayesian methodology. Henderson SG, Nelson BL, eds. Handbooks of Operations Research and Management Science, Vol. 13. Simulation (North-Holland Publishing, Amsterdam), 225–258.Google Scholar
• Chick SE, Inoue K (2001a) New procedures to select the best simulated system using common random numbers. Management Sci. 47(8): 1133–1149.Link, Google Scholar
• Chick SE, Inoue K (2001b) New two-stage and sequential procedures for selecting the best simulated system. Oper. Res. 49(5):732–743.Link, Google Scholar
• Chick SE, Branke J, Schmidt C (2010) Sequential sampling to myopically maximize the expected value of information. INFORMS J. Comput. 22(1):71–80.Link, Google Scholar
• Cosgrove BA, Lohmann D, Mitchell KE, Houser PR, Wood EF, Schaake JC, Robock Aet al. (2003) Real-time and retrospective forcing in the North American land data assimilation system (NLDAS) project. J. Geophysical Res. 108(D22):8842–8853.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DeGroot MH (2004) Optimal Statistical Decisions, Wiley Classics Library (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dominici F, Parmigiani G, Clyde M (2000) Conjugate analysis of multivariate normal data with incomplete observations. Canadian J. Statist. 28(3):533–550.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Engelbert HJ, Shiryaev AN (1980) On absolute continuity and singularity of probability measures. Banach Center Publications 6:121–132.Google Scholar
• Francis P, Smilowitz K, Tzur M (2006) The period vehicle routing problem with service choice. Transportation Sci. 40(4):439–454.Link, Google Scholar
• Frazier PI, Powell WB, Dayanik S (2009) The knowledge-gradient policy for correlated normal rewards. INFORMS J. Comput. 21(4):599–613.Link, Google Scholar
• Frazier PI, Xie J, Chick SE (2011) Value of information methods for pairwise sampling with correlations. Jain S, Creasey RR, Himmelspach J, White KP, Fu M, eds. Proc. 2011 Winter Simulation Conf. (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ), 3974–3986.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fu MC, Hu J-Q, Chen C-H, Xiong X (2007) Simulation allocation for determining the best design in the presence of correlated sampling. INFORMS J. Comput. 19(1):101–111.Link, Google Scholar
• Golub GH, Van Loan CF (1996) Matrix Computations, Johns Hopkins Studies in the Mathematical Sciences (Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore).Google Scholar
• Gupta AK, Nagar DK (2000) Matrix Variate Distributions (Chapman & Hall, Boca Raton, FL).Google Scholar
• Gupta SS, Miescke KJ (1996) Bayesian look ahead one-stage sampling allocations for selection of the best population. J. Statist. Planning Inference 54(2):229–244.Crossref, Google Scholar
• He D, Chick SE, Chen CH (2007) Opportunity cost and OCBA selection procedures in ordinal optimization for a fixed number of alternative systems. IEEE Trans. Systems, Man, Cybernetics C37(5):951–961.Crossref, Google Scholar
• He D, Lee LH, Chen CH, Fu MC, Wasserkrug S (2010) Simulation optimization using the cross-entropy method with optimal computing budget allocation. ACM Trans. Modeling Comput. Simulation 20(1): 4:1–4:22.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hong LJ (2006) Fully sequential indifference-zone selection procedures with variance-dependent sampling. Naval Res. Logist. 53(5):464–476.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hong LJ, Nelson BL (2009) A brief introduction to optimization via simulation. Rosetti MD, Hill RR, Johansson B, Dunkin A, Ingalls RG, eds. Proc. 2009 Winter Simulation Conf. (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ), 75–85.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Huang D, Allen TT, Notz WI, Zeng N (2006) Global optimization of stochastic black-box systems via sequential Kriging meta-models. J. Global Optim. 34(3):441–466.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jones DR, Schonlau M, Welch WJ (1998) Efficient global optimization of expensive black-box functions. J. Global Optim. 13(4):455–492.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kadane J, Trader R (1988) A Bayesian treatment of multivariate normal data with observations missing at random. Statist. Decision Theory Related Topics 4(1):225–234.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim J-Y (2002) Limited information likelihood and Bayesian analysis. J. Econometrics 107(1):175–193.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim S-H (2013) Statistical ranking and selection. Gass SI, Fu MC, eds. Encyclopedia of Operations Research and Management Science (Springer, New York), 1459–1469.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim S-H, Nelson BL (2001) A fully sequential procedure for indifference-zone selection in simulation. ACM Trans. Modeling Comput. Simulation 11(3):251–273.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim S-H, Nelson BL (2006a) On the asymptotic validity of fully sequential selection procedures for steady-state simulation. Oper. Res. 54(3): 475–488.Link, Google Scholar
• Kim S-H, Nelson BL (2006b) Selecting the best system. Henderson SG, Nelson BL, eds. Handbooks of Operations Research and Management Science, Vol. 13. Simulation (North-Holland Publishing, Amsterdam), 501–534.Google Scholar
• Kim S-H, Nelson BL (2007) Recent advances in ranking and selection. Henderson SG, Biller B, Hsieh M-H, Shortle J, Tew JD, Barton RR, eds. Proc. 2007 Winter Simulation Conf. (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ), 162–172.Google Scholar
• Kotz S, Nadarajah S (2004) Multivariate t Distributions and Their Applications (Cambridge University Press, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marmidis G, Lazarou S, Pyrgioti E (2008) Optimal placement of wind turbines in a wind park using Monte Carlo simulation. Renewable Energy 33(7):1455–1460.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nelson BL, Matejcik FJ (1995) Using common random numbers for indifference-zone selection and multiple comparisons in simulation. Management Sci. 41(12):1935–1945.Link, Google Scholar
• Pati D, Bhattacharya A, Pillai NS, Dunson D (2014) Posterior contraction in sparse Bayesian factor models for massive covariance matrices. Ann. Statist. 42(3):1102–1130.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Powell WB, Ryzhov IO (2012) Optimal Learning (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Qu H, Ryzhov IO, Fu MC (2012) Ranking and selection with unknown correlation structures. Laroque C, Himmelspach J, Pasupathy R, Rose O, Uhrmacher AM, eds. Proc. 2012 Winter Simulation Conf. (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ), 144–155.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Triantafyllopoulos K (2008) Missing observation analysis for matrix-variate time series data. Statist. Probab. Lett. 78(16):2647–2653.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yang WN, Nelson BL (1991) Using common random numbers and control variates in multiple-comparison procedures. Oper. Res. 39(4): 583–591.Link, Google Scholar