IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/joudef/v19y2022i3p263-286.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A review of the use and utility of industrial network-based open source simulators: functionality, security, and policy viewpoints

Author

Listed:
  • Uchenna Daniel Ani
  • Jeremy McKendrick Watson
  • Madeline Carr
  • Al Cook
  • Jason RC Nurse

Abstract

Simulation can provide a useful means to understand issues linked to industrial network operations. For transparent, collaborative, cost-effective solutions development, and to attract the broadest interest base, simulation is critical and open source suggested, because it costs less to access, install, and use. This study contributes new insights from security and functionality characteristics metrics to underscore the use and effectiveness of open source simulators. Several open source simulators span applications in communications and wireless sensor networks, industrial control systems, and the Industrial Internet of Things. Some drivers for their use span are as follows: supported license types; programming languages; operating systems platforms; user interface types; documentation and communication types; citations; code commits; and number of contributors. Research in these simulators is built around performance and optimization relative to flexibility, scalability, mobility, and active user support. No single simulator addresses all these conceivable characteristics. In addition to modeling contexts that match real-world scenarios and issues, an effective open source simulator needs to demonstrate credibility, which can be gained partly through actively engaging experts from interdisciplinary teams along with user contributions integrated under tight editorial controls. Government-led policies and regulations are also necessary to support their wider awareness and more productive use for real-world purposes.

Suggested Citation

  • Uchenna Daniel Ani & Jeremy McKendrick Watson & Madeline Carr & Al Cook & Jason RC Nurse, 2022. "A review of the use and utility of industrial network-based open source simulators: functionality, security, and policy viewpoints," The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation, , vol. 19(3), pages 263-286, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:joudef:v:19:y:2022:i:3:p:263-286
    DOI: 10.1177/1548512920953499
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1548512920953499
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1548512920953499?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Geiger, R. Stuart, 2017. "Summary Analysis of the 2017 GitHub Open Source Survey," SocArXiv qps53, Center for Open Science.
    2. Joost C. F. Winter & Amir A. Zadpoor & Dimitra Dodou, 2014. "The expansion of Google Scholar versus Web of Science: a longitudinal study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 1547-1565, February.
    3. G Dagkakis & C Heavey, 2016. "A review of open source discrete event simulation software for operations research," Journal of Simulation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(3), pages 193-206, August.
    4. Lakhani, Karim R. & von Hippel, Eric, 2003. "How open source software works: "free" user-to-user assistance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 923-943, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Engelhardt, Sebastian v. & Freytag, Andreas, 2013. "Institutions, culture, and open source," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 90-110.
    2. Fabio M. Manenti & Stefano Comino & Marialaura Parisi, 2005. "From Planning to Mature: on the Determinants of Open Source Take-Off," Industrial Organization 0507006, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 29 Sep 2005.
    3. Elizabeth J. Altman & Frank Nagle & Michael L. Tushman, 2013. "Innovating Without Information Constraints: Organizations, Communities, and Innovation When Information Costs Approach Zero," Harvard Business School Working Papers 14-043, Harvard Business School, revised Sep 2014.
    4. Tian Heong Chan & Shi-Ying Lim, 2023. "The Emergence of Novel Product Uses: An Investigation of Exaptations in IKEA Hacks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(5), pages 2870-2892, May.
    5. Vivek Kumar Singh & Prashasti Singh & Mousumi Karmakar & Jacqueline Leta & Philipp Mayr, 2021. "The journal coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A comparative analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 5113-5142, June.
    6. Thierry BURGER-HELMCHEN & Claude GUITTARD, 2008. "Are Users The Next Entrepreneurs? A Case Study On The Video Game Industry," Working Papers of BETA 2008-14, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    7. Wirth, Steffen, 2014. "Communities matter: Institutional preconditions for community renewable energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 236-246.
    8. Nicolas Jullien & Jean-Benoît Zimmermann, 2011. "FLOSS in an industrial economics perspective," Revue d'économie industrielle, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(4), pages 39-64.
    9. Gerald C. Kane & Jeremiah Johnson & Ann Majchrzak, 2014. "Emergent Life Cycle: The Tension Between Knowledge Change and Knowledge Retention in Open Online Coproduction Communities," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(12), pages 3026-3048, December.
    10. Li, Yung-Ming & Lee, Yi-Lin, 2010. "Pricing peer-produced services: Quality, capacity, and competition issues," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(3), pages 1658-1668, December.
    11. Jean-Michel Dalle & Paul A. David, 2007. "“It Takes All Kinds”: A Simulation Modeling Perspective on Motivation and Coordination in Libre Software Development Projects," Discussion Papers 07-024, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    12. Amit Mehra & Rajiv Dewan & Marshall Freimer, 2011. "Firms as Incubators of Open-Source Software," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 22-38, March.
    13. Susan Athey & Scott Stern, 2015. "The Nature and Incidence of Software Piracy: Evidence from Windows," NBER Chapters, in: Economic Analysis of the Digital Economy, pages 443-477, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Xavier Lecocq & Benoît Demil, 2005. "Les effets de l’introduction d’un système ouvert sur la structure d’un secteur : le cas de l’industrie américaine du jeu de rôle," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 8(3), pages 105-123, September.
    15. Alexia Gaudeul, 2008. "Consumer Welfare and Market Structure in a Model of Competition between Open Source and Proprietary Software," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2008-31, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    16. Murciano-Goroff, Raviv & Zhuo, Ran & Greenstein, Shane, 2021. "Hidden software and veiled value creation: Illustrations from server software usage," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    17. Stumpf, Marcus, 2017. "Kundenintegration bei Serviceleistungen: Empirische Analyse mit Empfehlungen für den Einsatz von Service-Communities," PraxisWISSEN Marketing: German Journal of Marketing, AfM – Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Marketing, vol. 2(01/2017), pages 38-51.
    18. Zhentao Liang & Jin Mao & Kun Lu & Gang Li, 2021. "Finding citations for PubMed: a large-scale comparison between five freely available bibliographic data sources," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(12), pages 9519-9542, December.
    19. Greenstein, Shane & Nagle, Frank, 2014. "Digital dark matter and the economic contribution of Apache," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 623-631.
    20. Lee Fleming & David M. Waguespack, 2007. "Brokerage, Boundary Spanning, and Leadership in Open Innovation Communities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(2), pages 165-180, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:joudef:v:19:y:2022:i:3:p:263-286. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.