Affiliation:
1. Vienna, VA 22182
2. National Science Foundation, Alexandria, VA 22314
Abstract
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is not to present new results; rather, it is to show that the current approach to model validation is not consistent with the accepted mathematics of probability theory. Specifically, we argue that the Sandia V&V Challenge Problem is ill-posed in that the answers sought do not, mathematically, exist. We apply our arguments to show the types of mistakes present in the papers presented in the Journal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification, Volume 1,1 along with the challenge problem. Further, we argue that, when the problem is properly posed, both the applicable methodology and the solution techniques are easily drawn from the well-developed mathematics of probability and decision theory. The unfortunate aspect of the challenge problem as currently stated is that it leads to incorrect and inappropriate mathematical approaches that should be avoided and corrected in the current literature.
Subject
Computational Theory and Mathematics,Computer Science Applications,Modeling and Simulation,Statistics and Probability
Reference38 articles.
1. Introduction: The 2014 Sandia Verification and Validation Challenge Workshop;ASME J. Verif., Validation Uncertainty Quantif.,2016
2. The 2014 Sandia Verification and Validation Challenge: Problem Statement;ASME J. Verif., Validation Uncertainty Quantif.,2016
3. Quantum Probabilities as Bayesian Probabilities,2001
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Closure on the Discussion of “Models, Uncertainty, and the Sandia V&V Challenge Problem” (Hazelrigg, G. A., and Klutke, G. A., ASME J. Verif. Valid. Uncert., 2020, 5(1), p. 015501);Journal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification;2020-09-01