Talk:Computer simulation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Meteorology
 This article related to meteorology and/or specific weather events is part of WikiProject Meteorology and Weather Events, an attempt to standardize and improve all articles related to weather or meteorology. You can help! Visit the project page or discuss an article at its talk page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
High This article has been rated as High-importance within WikiProject Meteorology.
This article is within the scope of Computing WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to computers and computing. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received an rating on the importance scale.
WikiProject Systems This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles about the idea of systems. If you would like to help, you can edit this article or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
High This article is on a subject of high importance within Systems.

This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

Contents

[edit] Half the story

It is said that computer simulations build on, and are a replacement for mathematical models. In my opininion, this only tells half of the story. Computer simulations also build on and are replacements for experiments. E.g., experiements in silico are used a lot in biology, and biology is not very much mathematized. In this case, the experiment is more a replacement of traditional experimentation than a replacement of mathematical modelizing. However, I agree it needs a modelization phase. Well, to summarize, IMHO the current article reflects only one side of the story: the modeling apsect (similar to maths) and totally avoids the experimentation aspect of computer simulations. Should be completed to aknowledge both aspects... See also: experiements in silico--Powo 14:24, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] references

this article needs references (citations of examples of the models)Anlace 02:34, 10 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Correction

It is not true that Richard Feynman considered computer models to be a "disease" ... this is a fallacy that was written by Michael Crichton and is oft-repeated by global warming deniers

What Feynman said was: "There is a computer disease that anybody who works with computers knows about. It's a very serious disease and it interferes completely with the work. The trouble with computers is that you 'play' with them!"

Feynman was a pioneer of computer modeling

Java-man 06:59, 31 July 2006 (UTC)


[edit] proposal

There could be a "simulation software comparison list" for "commercial product" and "open source".

Recently I did some study in simulation software(mostly commercial product). It is quite few comparison for different simulation softwares. An example is here[1]. But there are still many software not on the list.

And I think this[2] is good evaluation criteria.

is this proposal practicable? There so many major simulation software, and many information can not be easily found on internet.

84.162.77.95 17:16, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

This proposal seems somewhat unwieldy. It seems as though the focus of this page should be on the theory and history of computer simulation. The list of viable software simulations could be endless and is certainly an invitation for commercial exploitation of this page. Regards. Anlace 19:50, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the above proposal, while meritorious in principle, is unwieldy in practice. Sadly, I am the culprit who introduced some of the External links, including the Tool links for what I thought were significant and widely used commercial tools. Since that time a few, let's say, "less-significant" tools have crept in. We are therefore potentially embarked on the slippery slope of commercial exploitation. Since there are so many tools on the market for a wide variety of needs, the solution may be to only include external links to "good" third party tool survey pages. This would provide some modicum of utility to the prospective reader, while avoiding direct commercialization. Alternatively, we may wish to consider eliminating the Tools portion of the external links altogether. I'm not sure which is the best way to go. Any thoughts? ThreePD 00:38, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Computer?

Not sure what the computer does in the name of this lemma. It is just a tool that makes simulation easier to perform, and nothing more. The lemma should simply be Simulation, imho.--Guido den Broeder 14:56, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you. I think the more appropriate term these days is simulation software.

Carl142 23:40, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

22-Oct-2007: Formerly, computers mostly ran the simple math models, but for over 35 years, many, many computer simulations have grown to become massive simulations, where the "tool" has come to life and evolved into generations of living toolisms. These days, saying a "computer is just a tool" (for simulation) is like saying a spaceship is just a tool for travelling, like a "very-fast horse with a heatshield"; i.e, a gross oversimplification. Ergo, this "lemma" has devolved into a myriad of dilemmas: how to describe the quickly exploding worldwide diversity and numerous current applications of gargantuan computer simulations, within the scope of just a few dozen articles. Modeling with advanced mathematics was exceeded decades ago, and computer simulation has grown way beyond mathematics. -Wikid77 13:30, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rename this article?

I think that the term computer modeling would be a more appropriate term for this article, and the requested article to be merged should be left as a separate article called simulation software. The renamed computer modeling article addresses some very important issues, and the new simulation software article brings additional insight to the subject area. These terms mean different things to different people and merging them may create some confusion or misperception. Carl142 23:52, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Thegreatdr 17:16, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree that rename to Computer modeling is appropriate. Not in favour of merger with Simulation software at this time. Anlace 17:20, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Hmm, no, this would create a similar confusion. In modeling, too, a computer is just a tool. Guido den Broeder 19:23, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pitfalls in computer simulation section is factually incorrect

The "pitfalls in computer simulation" section is incorrect; if I have the height of 1,000,000 people, correct to 2 s.f, I can produce a confidence interval for the mean height of the people, accurate to more than 2 s.f, making only the assumption that the people's heights are randomly distributed with a continuous distribution.

Equally, a number might be used in a calculation, known to one significant figure; but if that number is scaled to have only a small effect on the final result, then the final result might well be much more accurate than 1 s.f. - for example, if I know that a person's height it 2m, to 1 s.f, and I know that they are standing on a building that is exactly 100m heigh, then I know the height to the top of their head is 102m, to 3 sf.

The "rules of significance arithmetic" are rules of thumb; this is why sensitivity analysis is used in modelling! - Pog 13:30, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Have modified the article to reflect the above - Pog 11:12, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Leader

The opening section of this article can be strengthened, including the use of concepts such as symbolic processing. Will get back to it later, if nobody else beats me to it. So much to do, so little time. -- Iterator12n Talk 03:30, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merger proposal 2

I propose that Computer simulator be merged into this page. The two pages have precisely the same scope; this page is far more complete. I invite someone familiar with simulation to perform the merge. Thanks, WalterGR (talk) 09:48, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

It seems to me that Computer simulator is really a very different topic. If anything, the few hints in this page (Computer simulation) that seem to relate to simulators should be moved to the other page. Simulation as (mostly) discussed here is a fundamentally different topic.
Perhaps that would be a better development as scientific simulation (the focus of this page) is a large topic in its own right. Simulators may be a big topic, too, but I can't speak to that. What I can confirm is that with a shelf full of reliable sources sitting in my office, none of these books mention simulators at all. So they seem different enough to warrant two different articles to me. If there is general disagreement about that, then the separation of the topics should me made clear by a redesign of this page. 128.195.89.186 (talk) 21:34, 19 February 2008 (UTC)