Encyclopedia of Operations Research and Management Science

2013 Edition
| Editors: Saul I. Gass, Michael C. Fu

Perturbation Analysis

  • Michael C. Fu
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1153-7_748

Introduction

Perturbation analysis (PA) is a sample path technique for analyzing changes in performance measures of stochastic systems due to changes in system parameters. In terms of stochastic simulation, which is the main setting for PA, the objective is to estimate sensitivities of the performance measures of interest with respect to system parameters, preferably without the need for additional simulation runs over what is required to estimate the system performance itself. The primary application is gradient estimation during the simulation of discrete-event systems, e.g., queueing and inventory systems. Besides their importance in sensitivity analysis, these gradient estimators are a critical component in gradient-based simulation optimization methods.

Let l( θ) be a performance measure of interest with parameter (possibly vector) of interest θ, focusing on those systems where l( θ) cannot be easily obtained through analytical means and therefore must be estimated from sample...
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Brémaud, P., & Vázquez-Abad, F. J. (1992). On the pathwise computation of derivatives with respect to the rate of a point process: The phantom RPA method. Queueing Systems: Theory and Applications, 10, 249–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cao, X. R. (1994). Realization probabilities: The dynamics of queueing systems. Boston: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cassandras, C. G., & Larfortune, S. (2008). Introduction to discrete event systems. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cassandras, C. G., & Strickland, S. G. (1989). On-line sensitivity analysis of Markov chains. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 34, 76–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dai, L. Y., & Ho, Y. C. (1995). Structural infinitesimal perturbation analysis for derivative estimation in discrete event dynamic systems. IEEE Transaction on Automatic Control, 40, 1154–1166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fu, M. C. (1994). Sample path derivatives for (s, S) inventory systems. Operations Research, 42(2), 351–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fu, M. C. (2006). Gradient estimation. In S. G. Henderson & B. L. Nelson (Eds.), Handbooks in operations research and management science: Simulation, chapter 19 (pp. 575–616). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  8. Fu, M. C. (2008). What you should know about simulation and derivatives. Naval Research Logistics, 55(8), 723–736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fu, M. C., Hong, L. J., & Hu, J. Q. (2009). Conditional Monte Carlo estimation of quantile sensitivities. Management Science, 55(12), 2019–2027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fu, M. C., & Hu, J. Q. (1995). Sensitivity analysis for Monte Carlo simulation of option pricing. Probability in the Engineering and Informational Sciences, 9(3), 417–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fu, M. C., & Hu, J. Q. (1997). Conditional Monte Carlo: Gradient estimation and optimization applications. Boston: Kluwer Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gaivoronski, A., Shi, L. Y., & Sreenivas, R. S. (1992). Augmented infinitesimal perturbation analysis: An alternate explanation. Discrete Event Dynamic Systems: Theory and Applications, 2, 121–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Glasserman, P. (1991). Gradient estimation via perturbation analysis. Boston: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  14. Glasserman, P. (2004). Monte Carlo methods in financial engineering. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  15. Gong, W. B., & Ho, Y. C. (1987). Smoothed perturbation analysis of discrete-event dynamic systems. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, AC-32, 858–867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ho, Y. C., & Cao, X. R. (1991). Perturbation analysis and discrete event dynamic systems. Boston: Kluwer Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ho, Y. C., Cao, X. R., & Cassandras, C. G. (1983). Infinitesimal and finite perturbation analysis for queueing networks. Automatica, 19, 439–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ho, Y. C., Eyler, M. A., & Chien, T. T. (1979). A gradient technique for general buffer storage design in a serial production line. International Journal of Production Research, 17, 557–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ho, Y. C., & Li, S. (1988). Extensions of infinitesimal perturbation analysis. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, AC-33, 827–838.Google Scholar
  20. Hong, L. J. (2009). Estimating quantile sensitivities. Operations Research, 57(1), 118–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Shi, L. Y. (1996). Discontinuous perturbation analysis of discrete event dynamic systems. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 41, 1676–1681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Siekman, P. (2000). New victories in the supply-chain revolution. Fortune, (October 30).Google Scholar
  23. Suri, R., & Zazanis, M. A. (1988). Perturbation analysis gives strongly consistent sensitivity estimates for the M/G/1 queue. Management Science, 34, 39–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Vakili, P. (1991). Using a standard clock technique for efficient simulation. Operations Research Letters, 10(8), 445–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Decision, Operations, and Information Technologies Department, Robert H. Smith SUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA