Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
research-article
Public Access

Computing Bayesian Means Using Simulation

Published: 13 January 2016 Publication History

Abstract

This article is concerned with the estimation of α = E{r(Z)}, where Z is a random vector and the function values r(z) must be evaluated using simulation. Estimation problems of this form arise in the field of Bayesian simulation, where Z represents the uncertain (input) parameters of a system and r(z) is the expected performance of the system when Z = z. Our approach involves obtaining (possibly biased) simulation estimates of the function values r(z) for a number of different values of z, and then using a (possibly weighted) average of these estimates to estimate α. We start by considering the case where the chosen values of z are independent and identically distributed observations of the random vector Z (independent sampling). We analyze the resulting estimator as the total computational effort c grows and provide numerical results. Then we show that improved convergence rates can be obtained through the use of techniques other than independent sampling. Specifically, our results indicate that the use of quasi-random sequences yields a better convergence rate than independent sampling, and that in the presence of a suitable special structure, it may be possible to use other numerical integration techniques (such as Simpson’s rule) to achieve the best possible rate c− 1/2 as c → ∞. Finally, we present and analyze a general framework of estimators for α that encompasses independent sampling, quasi-random sequences, and Simpson’s rule as special cases.

Supplementary Material

a10-andradottir-apndx.pdf (andradottir.zip)
Supplemental movie, appendix, image and software files for, Computing Bayesian Means Using Simulation

References

[1]
S. Andradóttir and V. M. Bier. 2000. Applying Bayesian ideas in simulation. Simulation Practice and Theory 8, 3--4, 253--280.
[2]
S. Andradóttir and P. W. Glynn. 2002. Computing Bayesian means using simulation. Technical Report, School of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology.
[3]
S. Asmussen and P. W. Glynn. 2007. Stochastic Simulation: Algorithms and Analysis. Springer, New York, NY, 2007.
[4]
H. P. Awad and P. W. Glynn. 2007. On the theoretical comparison of low-bias steady-state estimators. ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation 17, 1, Article 4.
[5]
P. Billingsley. 1968. Convergence of Probability Measures. Wiley, New York, NY.
[6]
P. Billingsley. 1995. Probability and Measure, 3rd ed. Wiley, New York, NY.
[7]
P. Bratley, B. L. Fox, and L. E. Schrage. 1987. A Guide to Simulation, 2nd ed. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY.
[8]
M. Broadie, Y. Du, and C. C. Moallemi. 2011. Efficient risk estimation via nested sequential simulation. Management Science 57, 6, 1172--1194.
[9]
S. E. Chick. 2006. Subjective probability and Bayesian methodology. Chapter 9 in Handbooks in Operations Research and Management Science: Simulation, edited by Shane G. Henderson and Barry L. Nelson. North-Holland, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
[10]
P. J. Davis and P. Rabinowitz. 1984. Methods of Numerical Integration, 2nd ed. Academic Press, Orlando, FL.
[11]
D. Duffie. 1996. Dynamic Asset Pricing Theory, 2nd edition. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
[12]
D. Duffie and P. Glynn. 1995. Efficient Monte Carlo simulation of security prices. Annals of Applied Probability 5, 4, 897--905.
[13]
P. W. Glynn and P. Heidelberger. 1992. Jackknifing under a budget constraint. ORSA Journal on Computing 4, 3, 226--234.
[14]
M. B. Gordy and S. Juneja. 2010. Nested simulation in portfolio risk measurement. Management Science 56, 10, 1833--1848
[15]
H. Lan, B. L. Nelson, and J. Staum. 2010. A confidence interval procedure for expected shortfall risk measurement via two-level simulation. Operations Research 58, 5, 1481--1490.
[16]
A. M. Law and W. D. Kelton. 2000. Simulation Modeling and Analysis, 3rd ed. McGraw-Hill, Boston, MA, 2000.
[17]
P. L’Ecuyer. 2009. Quasi-Monte Carlo methods with applications in finance. Finance and Stochastics 13, 3, 307--349.
[18]
S.-H. Lee and P. W. Glynn. 2003. Computing the distribution function of a conditional expectation via Monte Carlo: Discrete conditioning spaces. ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation 13, 3, 238--258.
[19]
H. Niederreiter. 1992. Random Number Generation and Quasi-Monte Carlo Methods. SIAM, Philadelphia, PA, 1992.
[20]
S. G. Steckley and S. G. Henderson. A kernel approach to estimating the density of a conditional expectation. Proceedings of the 2003 Winter Simulation Conference, edited by S. Chick, P. J. Sánchez, D. Ferrin, and D. J. Morrice. IEEE Press, 383--391.
[21]
Y. Sun, D. W. Apley, and J. Staum. 2011. Efficient nested simulation for estimating the variance of a conditional expectation. Operations Research 59, 4, 998--1007.
[22]
F. Zouaoui and J. R. Wilson. 2003. Accounting for parameter uncertainty in simulation input modeling. IIE Transactions 35, 9, 781--792.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Smooth Nested Simulation: Bridging Cubic and Square Root Convergence Rates in High DimensionsManagement Science10.1287/mnsc.2022.00204Online publication date: 20-Mar-2024
  • (2023)A versatile dynamic noise control framework based on computer simulation and modelingNonlinear Engineering10.1515/nleng-2022-027212:1Online publication date: 7-Jun-2023

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation
ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation  Volume 26, Issue 2
January 2016
152 pages
ISSN:1049-3301
EISSN:1558-1195
DOI:10.1145/2875131
Issue’s Table of Contents
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 13 January 2016
Accepted: 01 February 2015
Revised: 01 January 2015
Received: 01 December 2002
Published in TOMACS Volume 26, Issue 2

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Bayesian simulation
  2. Simpson’s rule
  3. bias
  4. consistency
  5. convergence rate
  6. independent sampling
  7. nested simulation
  8. numerical integration
  9. quasi-random numbers

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed

Funding Sources

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)46
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)11
Reflects downloads up to 04 Oct 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Smooth Nested Simulation: Bridging Cubic and Square Root Convergence Rates in High DimensionsManagement Science10.1287/mnsc.2022.00204Online publication date: 20-Mar-2024
  • (2023)A versatile dynamic noise control framework based on computer simulation and modelingNonlinear Engineering10.1515/nleng-2022-027212:1Online publication date: 7-Jun-2023

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Get Access

Login options

Full Access

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media