What is a Computer Simulation and What does this Mean for Simulation Validation?
Many questions about the fundamentals of some area take the form “What is …?” It does not come as a surprise then that, at the dawn of Western philosophy, Socrates asked the questions of what piety, courage, and justice are. Nor is it a wonder that the philosophical preoccupation with computer simulations centered, among other things, about the question of what computer simulations are. Very often, this question has been answered by stating that computer simulation is a species of a well-known method, e.g., experimentation. Other answers claim at least a close relationship between computer simulation and another method. In any case, correct answers to the question of what a computer simulation is should help us to better understand what validation of simulations is. The aim of this chapter is to discuss the most important proposals to understand computer simulation in terms of another method and to trace consequences for validation. Although it has sometimes been claimed that computer simulations are experiments, there are strong reasons to reject this view. A more appropriate proposal is to say that computer simulations often model experiments. This implies that the simulation scientists should to some extent imitate the validation of an experiment. But the validation of computer simulations turns out to be more comprehensive. Computer simulations have also been conceptualized as thought experiments or close cousins of the latter. This seems true, but not very telling since thought experiments are not a standard method and since it is controversial how they contribute to our acquisition of knowledge. I thus consider a specific view on thought experiments to make some progress on understanding simulations and their validation. There is finally a close connection between computer simulation and modeling, and it can be shown that the validation of a computer simulation is the validation of a specific model, which may either be thought to be mathematical or fictional.
KeywordsDefinition Experiments Thought experiments Argumentation Models Internal vs. external validity
I’m grateful to Julie Jebeile and Nicole J. Saam for useful comments and criticism.
- Baumberger, C., Knutti, R., & Hirsch Hadorn, G. (2017). Building confidence in climate model projections: An analysis of inferences from fit. WIREs Climate Change, 8(3), e454.Google Scholar
- Beeler, J. R. (1983). Radiation effects computer experiments. Amsterdam etc: North-Holland.Google Scholar
- Brown, J. R. (1991). The laboratory of the mind: Thought experiments in the natural sciences. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Brown, J. R., & Fehige, Y. (2017). Thought experiments. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Summer 2017 Edition). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2017/entries/thought-experiment/.
- Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. In N. L. Gale (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 88ff). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
- Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design & analysis issues for field settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.Google Scholar
- Einstein, A. (1961). Relativity, the special and the general theory. A Popular Exposition. London: Methuen (1920, here quoted after edition published by Crown, New York).Google Scholar
- Franklin, A., & Perovic, S. (2016). Experiment in physics. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Winter 2016 Edition). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/physics-experiment/.
- Frigg, R., & Hartmann, S. (2017). Models in science. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2017 Edition). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2017/entries/models-science/.
- Gupta, A. (2015). Definitions. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Summer 2015 Edition). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2015/entries/definitions/.
- Hartmann, S. (1996). The World as a process: Simulations in the natural and social sciences. In R. Hegselmann et al. (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
- Heidelberger, M. (2005). Experimentation and instrumentation. In D. Borchert (Ed.), Encyclopedia of philosophy. Appendix (pp. 12–20). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
- Imbert, C. (2017). Computer simulations and computational models in science. In L. Magnani & T. Bertolotti (Eds.), Springer handbook of model-based science (Vol. 34, pp. 733–779). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
- Lenhard, J. (2011). Epistemologie der Iteration. Gedankenexperimente und Simulationsexperimente. Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie, 59(1), 131–145.Google Scholar
- Morrison, M. (2015). Reconstructing reality: Models, mathematics, and simulations. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Nersessian, N. J. (1992). In the Theoretician’s laboratory: Thought experimenting as mental modeling. In PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association (Vol. 1992, pp. 291–301).Google Scholar
- Nersessian, Nancy J. (2007). Thought experimenting as mental modeling. Croatian Journal of Philosophy, 7(2), 125–161.Google Scholar
- Norton, J. D. (2004b). Why thought experiments do not transcend empiricism. In C. Hitchcock (Ed.), Contemporary debates in the philosophy of science. Blackwell: Oxford, pp. 44–66.Google Scholar
- Parker, W. (2009). Does matter really matter? Computer Simulations, Experiments, and Materiality, Synthese, 169, 483–496.Google Scholar
- Schlesinger, S. et al. (1979). Terminology for Model Credibility, Simulation, 32, 103–104.Google Scholar