IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v186y2011i1p23-3810.1007-s10479-011-0889-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A verification study of the stochastic salvo combat model

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Armstrong

Abstract

When the stochastic version of the salvo combat model was designed, several assumptions and approximations were made to keep its mathematical structure relatively simple. This paper examines the impact of those simplifications by comparing the outputs of the stochastic model to those from a Monte Carlo simulation across 486 scenarios. The model generally performed very well, even where the battle size was relatively small or the damage inflicted by each missile was not normally distributed. The model’s accuracy did decrease where missiles were positively correlated instead of independent. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Armstrong, 2011. "A verification study of the stochastic salvo combat model," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 186(1), pages 23-38, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:186:y:2011:i:1:p:23-38:10.1007/s10479-011-0889-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-011-0889-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10479-011-0889-0
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-011-0889-0?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wayne P. Hughes, 1995. "A salvo model of warships in missile combat used to evaluate their staying power," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(2), pages 267-289, March.
    2. Michael J. Armstrong, 2004. "Effects of lethality in naval combat models," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(1), pages 28-43, February.
    3. Michael J. Armstrong, 2007. "Effective attacks in the salvo combat model: Salvo sizes and quantities of targets," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(1), pages 66-77, February.
    4. Michael J. Armstrong, 2005. "A Stochastic Salvo Model for Naval Surface Combat," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 53(5), pages 830-841, October.
    5. Debasish Ghose & Jason Speyer & Jeff Shamma, 2002. "A Game Theoretical Multiple Resource Interaction Approach to Resource Allocation in an Air Campaign," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 15-40, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Donghyun Kim & Hyungil Moon & Donghyun Park & Hayong Shin, 2017. "An efficient approximate solution for stochastic Lanchester models," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 68(11), pages 1470-1481, November.
    2. Michael J. Armstrong, 2014. "Modeling Short-Range Ballistic Missile Defense and Israel's Iron Dome System," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 62(5), pages 1028-1039, October.

    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. Michael J. Armstrong, 2013. "The salvo combat model with area fire," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 60(8), pages 652-660, December.
    2. Younglak Shim & Michael P. Atkinson, 2018. "Analysis of artillery shoot‐and‐scoot tactics," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(3), pages 242-274, April.
    3. Michael J. Armstrong, 2007. "Effective attacks in the salvo combat model: Salvo sizes and quantities of targets," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(1), pages 66-77, February.
    4. Michael J. Armstrong, 2014. "Modeling Short-Range Ballistic Missile Defense and Israel's Iron Dome System," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 62(5), pages 1028-1039, October.
    5. Anelí Bongers & José L. Torres, 2017. "Revisiting the Battle of Midway: A counterfactual analysis," Working Papers 2017-01, Universidad de Málaga, Department of Economic Theory, Málaga Economic Theory Research Center.
    6. Michael J. Armstrong, 2005. "A Stochastic Salvo Model for Naval Surface Combat," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 53(5), pages 830-841, October.
    7. Donghyun Kim & Hyungil Moon & Donghyun Park & Hayong Shin, 2017. "An efficient approximate solution for stochastic Lanchester models," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 68(11), pages 1470-1481, November.
    8. Chen Wang & Vicki M. Bier, 2016. "Quantifying Adversary Capabilities to Inform Defensive Resource Allocation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(4), pages 756-775, April.
    9. Cullen, Andrew C. & Alpcan, Tansu & Kalloniatis, Alexander C., 2022. "Adversarial decisions on complex dynamical systems using game theory," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 594(C).
    10. Kolebaje, Olusola & Popoola, Oyebola & Khan, Muhammad Altaf & Oyewande, Oluwole, 2020. "An epidemiological approach to insurgent population modeling with the Atangana–Baleanu fractional derivative," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    11. Marvin L. King & David R. Galbreath & Alexandra M. Newman & Amanda S. Hering, 2020. "Combining regression and mixed-integer programming to model counterinsurgency," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 292(1), pages 287-320, September.
    12. Chad W. Seagren & Donald P. Gaver & Patricia A. Jacobs, 2019. "A stochastic air combat logistics decision model for Blue versus Red opposition," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 66(8), pages 663-674, December.
    13. Hans Liwång, 2020. "The interconnectedness between efforts to reduce the risk related to accidents and attacks - naval examples," Journal of Transportation Security, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 245-272, December.
    14. Claire Walton & Panos Lambrianides & Isaac Kaminer & Johannes Royset & Qi Gong, 2018. "Optimal motion planning in rapid‐fire combat situations with attacker uncertainty," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(2), pages 101-119, March.
    15. Thomas W. Lucas & John E. McGunnigle, 2003. "When is model complexity too much? Illustrating the benefits of simple models with Hughes' salvo equations," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(3), pages 197-217, April.
    16. Anelí Bongers & José L. Torres, 2021. "A bottleneck combat model: an application to the Battle of Thermopylae," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 2859-2877, December.
    17. Garrouste, Christelle & Loi, Massimo, 2009. "Applications De La Theorie Des Jeux A L'Education: Pour Quels Types Et Niveaux D'Education, Quels Modeles, Quels Resultats? [Applications of Game Theory in Education - What Types and At What Levels," MPRA Paper 31825, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Michael J. Armstrong, 2004. "Effects of lethality in naval combat models," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(1), pages 28-43, February.
    19. Connor McLemore & Donald Gaver & Patricia Jacobs, 2016. "A model for geographically distributed combat interactions of swarming naval and air forces," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 63(7), pages 562-576, October.

    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:spr:annopr:v:186:y:2011:i:1:p:23-38:10.1007/s10479-011-0889-0. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.