Simple Procedures for Selecting the Best Simulated System When the Number of Alternatives is Large

References

• Banerjee S. On confidence interval for two-means problem based on separate estimates of variances and tabulated values of t-table. Sankhyā (1961) A23:359–378Google Scholar
• Bechhofer R. E., Dunnett C. W., Goldsman D. M., Hartmann M. A comparison of the performances of procedures for selecting the normal population having the largest mean when the populations have a common unknown variance. Comm. Statist. (1990) B19:971–1006Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bechhofer R. E., Santner T. J., Goldsman D.Design and Analysis of Experiments for Statistical Selection, Screening and Multiple Comparisons (1995) (John Wiley, New York) Google Scholar
• Boesel J., Nelson B. L. Accounting for randomness in heuristic simulation optimization. Proc. 12th European Simulation Multiconference (1998) (Society for Computer Simulation International, Manchester, U.K) 634–638Google Scholar
• Boesel J., Nelson B. L., Kim S. H. Using ranking and selection to clean up after a simulation search. (2001) . Technical report, Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Sciences, Northwestern University, Evanston, ILGoogle Scholar
• Dudewicz E. J., Dalal S. R. Allocation of observations in ranking and selection with unequal variances. Sankhyā (1975) B37:28–78Google Scholar
• Eaton M. L. Some optimum properties of ranking procedures. Ann. Math. Statist. (1967) 38:124–137Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fu M. Stochastic optimization via simulation: A review. Ann. Oper. Res. (1994) 53:199–248Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goldsman D., Nelson B. L., Banks J. Comparing systems via simulation. The Handbook of Simulation (1998) (John Wiley, New York) 273–306Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gupta S. S. On a decision rule for a problem in ranking means. (1956) . Ph.D. dissertation Institute of Statistics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NCGoogle Scholar
• Gupta S. S. On some multiple decision (selection and ranking) rules. Technometrics (1965) 7:225–245Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gupta S. S., Kim W.-C., Santner T. J., Tamhane A. C. A two-stage elimination-type procedure for selecting the largest of several normal means with a common unknown variance. Design of Experiments: Ranking and Selection—Essays in Honor of Robert E. Bechhofer (1984) (Marcel Dekker, New York) 77–94Google Scholar
• Hall W. J. The most economical character of Bech-hofer and Sobel decision rules. Ann. Math. Statist. (1959) 30:964–969Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hartmann M. An improvement on Paulson's procedure for selecting the population with the largest mean from k normal populations with a common unknown variance. Sequential Anal. (1991) 10:1–16Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hochberg Y., Marcus R. Three stage elimination type procedures for selecting the best normal population when variances are unknown. Comm. Statist. (1981) A10:597–612Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hochberg Y., Tamhane A. C.Multiple Comparison Procedures (1987) (John Wiley, New York) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jacobson S., Schruben L. A review of techniques for simulation optimization. Oper. Res. Letters (1989) 8:1–9Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim S. H., Nelson B. L. A fully sequential procedure for indifference-zone selection in simulation. ACM TOMACS (2001) 11in pressCrossref, Google Scholar
• Koenig L. W., Law A. M. A procedure for selecting a subset of size m containing the l best of k independent normal populations, with applications to simulation. Comm. Statist. (1985) B14:719–734Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mukhopadhyay N., Solanky T. K. S.Multistage Selection and Ranking Procedures: Second-order Asymptotics (1994) (Marcel Dekker, New York) Google Scholar
• Nelson B. L., Goldsman D. Comparisons with a standard in simulation experiments. Management Sci. (2001) 47:449–463Link, Google Scholar
• Nelson B. L., Matejcik F. J. Using common random numbers for indifference-zone selection and multiple comparisons in simulation. Management Sci. (1995) 41:1935–1945Link, Google Scholar
• Paulson E. A sequential procedure for selecting the population with the largest mean from k normal populations. Ann. Math. Statist. (1964) 35:174–180Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rinott Y. On two-stage selection procedures and related probability-inequalities. Comm. Statist. (1978) A7:799–811Crossref, Google Scholar
• Santner T. J. A restricted subset selection approach to ranking and selection problems. Ann. Statist. (1975) 3:334–349Crossref, Google Scholar
• Santner T. J., Behaxeteguy M. A two-stage procedure for selecting the largest normal mean whose first stage selects a bounded random number of populations. J. Statist. Planning and Inference (1992) 31:147–168Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sullivan D. W., Wilson J. R. Restricted subset selection procedures for simulation. Oper. Res. (1989) 37:52–71Link, Google Scholar
• Tamhane A. C. A three-stage elimination type procedure for selecting the largest normal mean (common unknown variance). Sankhyā (1976) B38:339–349Google Scholar
• Tamhane A. C. Multiple comparisons in model I one-way anova with unequal variances. Comm. Statist. (1977) A6:15–32Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tamhane A. C. On a class of multistage selection procedures with screening for the normal means problem. Sankhyā (1980) B42:197–216Google Scholar
• Tamhane A. C., Bechhofer R. E. A two-stage minimax procedure with screening for selecting the largest normal mean. Comm. Statist. (1977) A6:1003–1033Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tamhane A. C., Bechhofer R. E. A two-stage minimax procedure with screening for selecting the largest normal mean (ii): an improved PCS lower bound and associated tables. Comm. Statist. (1979) A8:337–358Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tong Y. L.Probability Inequalities in Multivariate Distributions (1980) (Academic Press, New York) Google Scholar
• Wilcox R. R. A table for Rinott's selection procedure. J. Quality Tech. (1984) 16:97–100Crossref, Google Scholar