The Generic Methodology for Verification and Validation to support acceptance of models, simulations and data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Generic Methodology for Verification and Validation (GM-VV) is a generic and comprehensive methodology for structuring, organizing and managing the verification and validation (V&V) of modelling and simulation (M&S) assets. The GM-VV is an emerging recommended practice within the Simulation Interoperability Standards Organization (SISO). The GM-VV provides a technical framework to efficiently develop arguments to justify why M&S assets are acceptable or unacceptable for a specific intended use. This argumentation supports M&S stakeholders in their acceptance decision-making process regarding the development, application and reuse of such M&S assets. The GM-VV technical framework assures that during the execution of the V&V work the decisions, actions, information and evidence underlying such acceptance arguments will be traceable, reproducible, transparent and documented. Since the GM-VV is a generic (i.e. abstract) methodology it must be tailored to fit the specific V&V needs of a M&S organization, project or application domain. Therefore, V&V practitioners must incorporate specific V&V techniques within the generic architectural template offered by the GM-VV in order to properly assess the M&S assets under review. The first part of this paper provides an introductory overview of the GM-VV basic principles, concepts, methodology components and their interrelationships. The second part of the paper focuses on how the GM-VV may be tailored for a specific simulation application. This effort is illustrated with some results and lessons learned from several technology demonstration programs of the Dutch Ministry of Defence.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.066 | 0.089 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.008 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".