Introduction: Computer Simulation Validation

  • Claus BeisbartEmail author
  • Nicole J. Saam
Part of the Simulation Foundations, Methods and Applications book series (SFMA)


To provide an introduction to this book, we explain the motivation to publish this volume, state its main goal, characterize its intended readership, and give an overview of its content. To this purpose, we briefly summarize each chapter and put it in the context of the whole volume. We also take the opportunity to stress connections between the chapters. We conclude with a brief outlook.

The main motivation to publish this volume was the diagnosis that the validation of computer simulation needs more attention in practice and in theory. The aim of this volume is to improve our understanding of validation. To this purpose, computer scientists, mathematicians, working scientists from various fields, as well as philosophers of science join efforts. They explain basic notions and principles of validation, embed validation in philosophical frameworks such as Bayesian epistemology, detail the steps needed during validation, provide best practice examples, reflect upon challenges to validation, and put validation in a broader perspective. As we suggest in our outlook, the validation of computer simulations will remain an important research topic that needs cross- and interdisciplinary efforts. A key issue is whether, and if so, how very rigorous approaches to validation that have proven useful in, e.g., engineering can be extended to other disciplines.


  1. Augusiak, J., Van den Brink, P. J., & Grimm, V. (2014). Merging validation and evaluation of ecological models to ‘evaludation’: A review of terminology and a practical approach. Ecological Modelling, 280, 117–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Godfrey-Smith, P. (2003). Theory and reality. An introduction to the philosophy of science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  3. Feinstein, A. H., & Cannon, H. M. (2003). A hermeneutical approach to external validation of simulation models. Simulation & Gaming, 34, 186–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Frigg, R., Bradley, S., Du, H., & Smith, L. A. (2014). Laplace’s demon and the adventures of his apprentices. Philosophy of Science, 81(1), 31–59.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Frigg, R., & Reiss, J. (2009). The philosophy of simulation: Hot new issues or same old stew? Synthese, 169(3), 593–613.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ghetiu, T., Polack, F. A., & Bown, J. (2010). Argument-driven validation of computer simulations–A necessity rather than an option. In VALID 2010. The Second International Conference on Advances in System Testing and Validation Lifecycle, August 22–27 (pp. 1–4). Nice, France, IEEE Press.Google Scholar
  7. Goldman, Alvin I. (1999). Knowledge in a social world. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Grimm, V., Revilla, E., Berger, U., Jeltsch, F., Mooij, W. M., Railsback, S. F., et al. (2005). Pattern-oriented modeling of agent-based complex systems: Lessons from ecology. Science, 310, 987–991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Harding, A., Keegan, M., & Kelly, S. (2010). Validating a dynamic population microsimulation model: Recent experience in Australia. International Journal of Microsimulation, 3(2), 46–64.Google Scholar
  10. Hartmann, S. (1996). The world as a process: Simulations in the natural and social sciences. In: R. Hegselmann, U. Müller, & K. G. Troitzsch, (Eds.), Modelling and simulation in the social sciences from the philosophy of science point of view, theory and decision library (pp. 77–100). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  11. Herskovitz, P. J. (1991). A theoretical framework for simulation validation: Popper’s falsificationism. International Journal of Modelling and Simulation, 11, 56–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Humphreys, P. (2004). Extending ourselves: Computational science, empiricism, and scientific method. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. IPCC. (2014). Climate change 2013–The physical science basis working group I contribution to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Kaldor, N. (1968). Capital accumulation and economic growth. In F. A. Lutz & D. C. Hague (Eds.), The theory of capital (Reprint ed., pp. 177–222). London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  15. Kertész, A. (1993). Artificial intelligence and the sociology of scientific knowledge. Frankfurt/M.: Lang.Google Scholar
  16. Klein, E. E., & Herskovitz, P. J. (2005). Philosophical foundations of computer simulation validation. Simulation & Gaming, 36, 303–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kleindorfer, G. B., O’Neill, L., & Ganeshan, R. (1998). Validation in simulation: Various positions in the philosophy of science. Management Science, 44, 1087–1099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Murray-Smith, D. J. (2015). Testing and validation of computer simulation models: Principles methods and applications. Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nickles, T. (1989). Integrating the science studies disciplines. In S. Fuller, M. de Mey, T. Shinn, & S. Woolgar (Eds.), The cognitive turn. Sociological and psychological perspectives on science (pp. 225–256). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  20. Oberkampf, W. L., & Roy, C. J. (2010). Verification and validation in scientific computing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Oreskes, N., Shrader-Frechette, K., & Belitz, K. (1994). Verification, validation, and confirmation of numerical models in the earth sciences. Science, 263, 641–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Parker, W. S. (2008). Franklin, holmes, and the epistemology of computer simulation. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 22(2), 165–183.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Parker, W. S. (2009). Confirmation and adequacy-for-purpose in climate modeling. Aristotelian Society Supplementary, 83, 233–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Roache, P. J. (2009). Fundamentals of verification and validation. New Mexico: Hermosa Publishers.Google Scholar
  25. Rudner, R. (1953). The scientist qua scientist makes value judgments. Philosophy of Science, 20, 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schlesinger, S., et al. (1979). Terminology for model credibility. Simulation, 32, 103–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Walker, D. C., Hill, G., & Wood, S. M. et al. (2 more authors). (2004). Agent-based computational modeling of wounded epithelial cell monolayers. IEEE Transactions on Nanobioscience, 3(3), 153–163.Google Scholar
  28. Winsberg, E. (2001). Simulations, models, and theories. Complex physical systems and their representations. Philosophy of Science, 68, S442–S454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Winsberg, E. (2010). Science in the age of computer simulation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Philosophy, University of BernBernSwitzerland
  2. 2.Institute for Sociology, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-NürnbergErlangenGermany

Personalised recommendations