1 / 29

Simulation with System Dynamics Models IE 680 Spring 2007

Simulation with System Dynamics Models IE 680 Spring 2007. Po-Ching C. DeLaurentis April 19, 2007. Outline. Systems Thinking System Dynamics (SD) Paradigm Comparison Basics of System Dynamics Quantification Challenges Simulation with System Dynamics- An Example Summary

Patman
Download Presentation

Simulation with System Dynamics Models IE 680 Spring 2007

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Simulation with System Dynamics ModelsIE 680 Spring 2007 Po-Ching C. DeLaurentis April 19, 2007

  2. Outline • Systems Thinking • System Dynamics (SD) • Paradigm Comparison • Basics of System Dynamics • Quantification Challenges • Simulation with System Dynamics- An Example • Summary • System Dynamics Resources

  3. Systems Thinking • Systems Thinking • Early 20th century physicists began to challenge Newtonian precepts; Werner Heisenberg, Norbert Weiner, Von Bertalanffy • “An approach for developing models to promote our understanding of events, patterns of behavior resulting in the events, and even more importantly, the underlying structure responsible for the patterns of behavior”* * http://www.systems-thinking.org

  4. System Dynamics • System Dynamics • Introduced by Jay Forrester of MIT in 1958 • “The study of information-feedback characteristics of industry activity to show how organizational structure, amplification (in policies), and time delays (in decisions and actions) interact to influence the success of the enterprise” (Forrest 1958 & 1961)

  5. High Abstraction Less Details Macro Level Strategic Level Aggregates, Global Casual Dependencies, Feedback Dynamics, … • System Dynamics • Levels (aggregates) • Stock-and-Flow Diagrams • Feedback loops • Agent Based • Active objects • Individual behavior rules • Direct or indirect interaction • Environment models • Discrete Event • Entities (passive objects) • Flowcharts and/or transport networks • Resources Middle Abstraction Medium Details Meso Level Tactical Level Low Abstraction More Details Micro Level Operational Level Mainly discrete Mainly continuous Individual objects, exact sizes, distances, velocities, timings, … Paradigm Comparison of System Dynamics, Discrete Event & Agent Based • Borshchev A , Filippov A. From System Dynamics and Discrete Event to Practical Agent Based Modeling: Reasons, Techniques, Tools. Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference, July 25-29, 2004, Oxford, England, UK.

  6. Rate Stock A Stock B Decision Rules Basics of System Dynamics Stock-and-Flow Casual Loops

  7. Basics of System Dynamics (cont’d) Brownies_in_Stomach(t) = Brownies_in_Stomach (t - dt) + (eating - digesting) * dt INIT Brownies_in_Stomach = 0 DOCUMENT: Initially Andy’s stomach is empty. UNITS: brownies eating = 1 DOCUMENT: Andy eats a brownie every hour. UNITS: brownies/hour digesting = 1/2 DOCUMENT: Andy digests 1 brownie every 2 hours. He therefore digests a half a brownie every hour. UNITS: brownies/hour

  8. Quantification Challenges Basics of System Dynamics (cont’d) • Wide Range of System Dynamics Applications • Corporate planning and policy design • Economic behavior • Public management and policy • Biological and medical modeling • Energy and the environment • Supply chain management

  9. Quantification Challenges • System dynamics is strategic in orientation and it is often seen to have ‘soft’ variables • Example (Coyle 2000): Consumer Satisfaction as an influence on New_Order_Inflow_Rate = Basic_Inflow * Satisfaction_Multiplier A variable that may range from 0 to an upper limit, and have a nonlinear relationship with Consumer Satisfaction

  10. Quantification Challenges (Cont’d) • If it becomes New_Order_Inflow_Rate = Basic_Inflow * Satisfaction_Multiplier * Quality_Multiplier * Price_Multimplier * etc. The number of uncertainties becomes very large; Strong assumption that multipliers are multiplicative. EX: 0.5 * 0.5 * 0.5 = 0.125  only 25% of 0.5 0.510 = 0.000977  only 1/500 of 0.5

  11. Quantification Challenges- Example

  12. Simulation Example • Police & Driver– A System Dynamics Model for a Mixed Strategy Game (Kim & Kim, 1997) • System dynamics: dynamic fluctuations of a system • Game Theory • Players; preferences & strategies; payoff/utility functions • Players change decisions in response to other players’ actions • Finding equilibrium states in game situation • Dominant vs. mixed strategies

  13. Police & Driver Game • “You are driving your car in a hurry…there are two states of the world: either the police are nearby or they are not. There are two actions to choose from: either to violate the speed limit or to abide by the law.” (Tsebelis 1989) q 1-q p 1-p Note: c1 > a1 b1 > d1 a2 > b2 d2 > c2

  14. Police & Driver Game (Cont’d) • Mixed strategy equilibrium results: • p = prob. with which the driver chooses to speed • q = prob. with which the policeman decides to patrol • Solved for: p* = (d2-c2)/(a2-b2+d2-c2) q* = (b1-d1)/(b1-d1+c1-a1) • Observation • The probability of the driver’s law violation is not determined by the payoffs for the driver • Increase in penalty ( a1) • Argument • A contradiction to common sense: increase in penalty is conceived as one the most effective tools for policy implementation

  15. Police & Driver Game with System Dynamics • Why does game theory produce theorems inconsistent with common sense? • Game theory applicability • Equilibrium applicability • How to model this game with SD? • Probability of players’ behaviors • Two independent players in the game • Population mixed-strategy game

  16. System Dynamics Diagram of the Game parameters

  17. Patrol to office Quitting Time Quit Patrol Difference eup eunp Policemen in Office Policemen in Patrolling prob p Go Patrol Office to Patrol dpcnp euno euv dpvnp eunv Patrolling Time eup dpvp dpcp ppvp ppvnp ppcnp ppcp Speed Down Time Violation to Conform Speed Down prob v Drivers in Violation Drivers in Conforming Difference euv eunv Speed Up Conform to Violation Speed Up Time System Dynamics Diagram of the Game (redrawn) parameters

  18. Simulation Results • Oscillation Rather than Equilibrium p*=0.25 (2:prob p) q* = 0.5 (1:prob v) Tendency towards the equilibrium state But it takes a long time!!

  19. Simulation Results (Cont’d) • The Effectiveness of Penalty Increase p*=0.25 (2:prob p) q* = 0.22 (1:prob v) Increase in Penalty Tendency towards the equilibrium state Prob. of violation reduced to < 0.25 for about 50 days

  20. Simulation Results (Cont’d) • Considering Information Delay Between the Police & the Driver 10 days for Driver 5 days for Police Larger amplitude Not approaching steady state

  21. Simulation Results (Cont’d) • The Effectiveness of Penalty Increase with Information Delay Increase in Penalty Prob. of violation is lightly reduced

  22. Simulation Results (Cont’d) • Effectiveness of Automatic Penalty Management (without info delay) • Police change the amount of penalty in line with probability of changes in law violation Equilibrium reached after a short period of fluctuation Equations

  23. Policy Implications • Simulation results suggest: • Temporarily reduce the violation tendency of drivers by changing the amount of penalty • Penalty management can decrease the amplitude of fluctuating behavior of drivers • For policy makers • Temporary reductions of speed limit violation will be a sufficient incentive for introduction of penalty increase • Penalty management can reduce the amplitude of fluctuation violations • Max. level of violation  probability of car accidents?

  24. Insights • Information delay & policy interruptions exist in a dynamic system • Mixed-strategy equilibrium may be a poor guide • Equilibrium vs. Steady State • In the real world, players are usually myopic • System Dynamics: simulate evolutionary processes toward (non-)equilibrium states • Game Theory: a framework for modeling the world of competition and cooperation

  25. Summary • System Dynamics • Stock-and-flow • Casual loops • Higher, strategic level modeling • Dynamic behaviors of a system • Transient processes • Challenges: quantification of influencing factors; underlying effects

  26. System Dynamics Resources • System Dynamics Society • http://www.systemdynamics.org/ • Sterman, Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World, McGraw-Hill/Irwin, 2000 • Software • VenSim– http://www.vensim.com/ • Stella– http://www.iseesystems.com/

  27. Questions

  28. Ref. Model Equations

  29. System Dynamics Diagram of the Game (Cont’d) Parameters

More Related