Talk:Simulation
Page contents not supported in other languages.
 | Daily page views
|
 | This level-5 vital article is ratedB-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale.It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
One topic which I believe should be dealt with separately is Military Simulation, and in particular the history of the military simulation.67.180.130.22002:09, 7 February 2007 (UTC)Richard Garfield[reply]
I don't know exactly how this should be dealt with, but there should be either a disambiguation page, it should describe it on this page, or there should be another article page on the subject of surrealist simulation (as practiced in Breton and Eluard'sThe Immaculate Conception). --Daniel C. Boyer 18:50, 3 Aug 2003 (UTC)
I am planning tomerge the articlessimulate andsimulator be with the current article,simulation, which has the most links, and is the primary concept. --Lexor 14:58, 11 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Reading the simulation article I get the impression that different authors have very diverse definitions of simulation. This is logical as simulation is a very wide field ranging from real world simulations (such as emergency excercises) to computer based human in the loop simulations (e.g. flight simulation), and from business process simulations to computer gaming.
I do not exactly see how, but it would be nice if this article is more structured maybe referring to more specific articles about different types of simulation (real life simulations, computer simulations, hybrid ...) and, or different aspects of simulation (e.g. simulator, simulation experiment, simulation formalisms). --Roy 15:52, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)
The link to "descrete event simulation" goes back to the main simulation page. -Laurel Travis, 6/25/05
I performed some limited edits of the opening paragraph for (hopefully) somewhat improved clarity and readability. --ThreePD02:11, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have removed "Role Play Simulation" as a simulation type, as it really belongs to "Virtual Simulation", where real human players work on simulated equipments in a simulated environment.Jdu20:27, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am a little confused by the fact that the statementTraining simulations typically come in one of four categories: only lists examples of three categories.Is one category missing?
I think it's quite strange that this plane appears as comparable to theF-106 on that plane's page when on the Gripen's page is compared to much newer aircraft such as theRAFALE or theEurofighter Typhoon. (190.48.240.24822:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
I did a series of minor edits for grammar and wording in the opening paragraphs and then reworked the external link section extensively. Formerly it just globbed all the external simulation links together. I separated it into some major categories and re-allocated accordingly. I then added what I thought were some glaring omissions (lack of a link to the SCS.org and the EUROSIM consortium for two). I added a couple big lists of organizations and simulation education courses that came up as first strikes on google, and please forgive me, but I also added a couple links to some common commercial tool. I'm in no way associated with these companies and don't even personally use their software but I know they are very common in the industry (Modelica, Mathematica, and Simul8). Feel free to add, modify or delete as you think appropriate. I just wanted to take a crack at presenting some potentially useful content to readers.
ThreePD19:04, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I went through this article, and while they address some elements of human patient simulation I was unable to find anything substantial and/or significant. I think we really need to address this as HPS is growing rapidly in health care education. Im rather new to Wiki, how do I go about starting a new article specifically on HPS?
Allen Hanberg—The precedingunsigned comment was added byAhanberg (talk •contribs) 16:52, August 23, 2007 (UTC).
seeHelp:Starting_a_new_page :-)89.103.168.25 (talk)11:09, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Still no Human Patient Simulation??
I also have searched Wikipedia for Human Patient Simulation and have come up short. As the previous comment is from 2007, I can tell that there hasn't been much progress on getting an additional page added specifically for this information content. As a new professional in the field of medical simulation, I think it would be very beneficial to have a direct Wiki site with more information on the subject. Like previously stated, Human Patient Simulation is a fast growing field with enormous potential. More and more medical learners are being exposed to simulation during their schooling.
As we know from the "Simulation" Wiki page, simulation originated in the military, more specifically the air force, but it has expanded into a whole new realm in the medical world. Health professionals of all levels are being exposed to Human Patient Simulation training. This educational tool is crucial to learners being able to expand their knowledge in no risk situations. Through the use of Human Patient Simulation, we are able to give learners a space where they can feel comfortable and practice the skills they have learned in the classroom without any risk to patients.
There are many studies out there looking at the outcomes of learners who are exposed to simulation training versus those that are not. The journal of Academic Medicine published an article relating to a study about simulation training in the medical field. This article titled "Does Simulation-Based Medical Education With Deliberate Practice Yield Better Results Than Traditional Clinical Education? A Meta-Analytic Comparative Review of the Evidence" shows us that simulation training is increasing positive patient outcomes. This study included over 600 learners from many different fields of medicine and different scopes of practice (McGgahie, 2011, pg. 708).
Throughout medical training, educators have been looking for better ways to improve students' retention of information, which indubitably transfers into better patient practices. We learn from the before mentioned study that "A growing body of evidence shows that clinical skills acquired in medical simulation laboratory settings transfer directly to improved patient care practices and better patient outcomes" (McGaghie, 2011, p. 708). Traditional teaching and learning styles are being improved upon by simulation and the outcomes are outstanding. Human Patient Simulation does more than just give learners a safe haven to practice, it gives them the opportunity to expand upon and become superior in their field of practice. "The power and utility of SBME [simulation based medical education] with DP [deliberate practice] toward the goal of skill acquisition are no longer in doubt, especially compared with traditional models of clinical education" (McGaghie, 2011, p. 708).
References:McGaghie, William C. PhD, Issenberg, Barry S. MD, Cohen, Elaine R., Barsuk, Jeffrey H. MD, Wayne, Diane B. MD. (2011). Does Simulation-Based Medical Education with Deliberate Practice Yield Better Results Than Traditional Clinical Education? A Meta-Analytic Comparative Review of the Evidence.Academic Medicine, Vol.86, No. 6, pgs. 706-711.Sgrah019 (talk)22:53, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Sara Kagarise[reply]
I think that war games and military simulation are two almost entirely different concepts in that war games require a human-in-the-loop, while military simulation as used by military agencies worldwide consists of modeling a specific scenario in computers, running it and analyzing the results. Could someone look at it please?Avmatso04:57, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:EP09 symulator.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used underfair use but there is noexplanation or rationale as to why its use inthis Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to theboilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent withfair use.
Please go tothe image description page and edit it to include afair use rationale. Using one of the templates atWikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described oncriteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at theMedia copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk)05:58, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
—Precedingunsigned comment added by74.184.138.211 (talk)11:05, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This article unfortunately seems to attract an ever-growing number of inappropriate external links. I've trimmed the links section right back (and I do meanright back!), and suggest that anyone wishing to add external links carefully readWP:LINKS first. From the guideline, external links "should be kept to a minimum of those that are meritable, accessible and appropriate to the article." It's not the purpose of Wikipedia to promote websites, software, groups or organisations. If you're not sure about the suitability of a link, it can always be proposed here on the talk page for discussion.EyeSerenetalk17:28, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've created a separate page dedicated entirely tomedical simulation, examples, applications, and other information regarding the subject. I did my best to adhere to Wikipedia standards, but make no promises to it being exact as I have had no prior article writing experiences with Wikipedia. Any help in cleaning up mistakes that I may have made is appreciated. In addition, perhaps it would be best to merge some of the medical knowledge from this page into my new page? Also, the History section is definitely lacking and I admit that I did not spend much time on that.Jskiles1 (talk)22:35, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
After careful consideration, almost the entirevirtual training article could fit in a heading inSimulation#More examples in different areas. —Arthur Rubin(talk)08:15, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion isnot moved.123.24.108.135 (talk)03:38, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Could someone please explain why "Dream hypothesis" redirects here. I was looking for the Cartesian concept. Does such an article exist?--852_Charlie_Papa (talk)20:44, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This topic occurs twice, without good reason, in this article.
The section titled"Simulation and games" should probably be merged with the section"Simulation in entertainment - Examples of entertainment simulation - Computer and video games".
In this section, the example of analog or 'paper' simulation games should probably be explicitly mentioned. Also, the statement "Moreover, they represent the interactions between the playable characters
and the environment realistically" is too broad in its given context. A distinction should be made between simulations ofthe experience of enagaging in an activity (such as driving a car) vs interactive
simulations of thefunctioning of a system (as in SimCity). In games that are aninteractive model of a system, the player usually does not 'realistically interact' with the environment,
and there may be no 'playable character' as such (a good example of this would beThe Sims).— Precedingunsigned comment added by98.237.34.64 (talk)03:41, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This text was cut fromStimulation. I put it here in case anybody feels like doing something with it in this article.Lova Falktalk07:35, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Stimulation describes a type of simulation whereby artificially generated signals are fed to real equipment or software in order to Stimulate it to produce the result required for training, maintenance or forR&D. The real equipment can be radar, sonics, instruments, software and so on. In some cases the Stimulation equipment can be carried in the real platform or carriage vehicle (that is the Ship, AFV or Aircraft) and be used for so-called "embedded training" during its operation, by the generation ofsimulated scenarios which can be dealt with in a realistic manner by use of the normal controls and displays. In the overall definition of simulation, the alternative method is called "emulation" which is the simulation of equipment by entirely artificial means by physical and software modelling.
“See also“ “Grey box completion and validation“ has been removed anonymously without explanation from this and several other topics. Following advice from Wikipedia if there are no objections (please provide your name and reasons), I plan to reinstate the reference in a weeks time.
The removed reference provides techniques for computer model development as is need for many simulations. In particular most models are incomplete (i.e. a grey box) and thus need completion and validation. This reference seems to be within the appropriate content of the “See also” section see Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Layout#See_also_section.
BillWhiten (talk)05:33, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There is a good overview description of the complexity ofCFD simulation of rocket engine combustion, where simulation is required over eight (8) orders of magnitude in time scale, and six (6) orders of magnitude in length. Fascinating talk at GTC 2015 in the past few weeks:GPUs to Mars: Full-scale Simulation of SpaceX's Mars Rocket Engine, Adam Lichtl and Steven Jones, GPU Technology Conference, spring 2015. The approach described in the talk (wavelet/grid adaptation as a means ofsignificantly decreasing storage and compute power required to do a quality CFD simulation of complex and large combustion process like this) might be useful for improving the article. What's new is that this is being done on standard GPU acceleration chips, massively parallel, at much lower cost, and not really possible on previous processor approaches. Novel approach to doing combustion CFD with low-cost GPUs. —N2e (talk)03:40, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link onSimulation. Please take a moment to reviewmy edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visitthis simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored byInternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other thanregular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editorshave permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see theRfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template{{source check}}(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot(Report bug)22:55, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This article represents Wikipedia at its worst. Anyone hoping to gain insightabout simulation will leave this article shaking their heads, wondering whatthey have just read.— Precedingunsigned comment added by59.156.67.94 (talk)04:26, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The bulleted item on 'headphones' is dubious. The conventional approach for 3D Audio headphones is to use an Head-related Transfer FunctionHead-related_transfer_function (HRTF) model. This is not a simulation but anemulation. The HRTF model is emulating the amplification and measurement system that was used to capture the Head-related Impulse Responses (HRIRs). In doing so, it explicitly emulates what would have been captured by the dummy-head microphone if a new sound would have be played on that system at the given location.— Precedingunsigned comment added by81.103.139.94 (talk)22:51, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Simulation, by any dictionary, has nothing to do with science Yoandri Dominguez Garcia 08:10, 31 December 2018 (UTC)— Precedingunsigned comment added byYoandri Dominguez Garcia (talk •contribs)
Is there a reason for the order of terms inSimulation § Classification and terminology? Should the terms be ordered differently, such as alphabetically or some other way?Biogeographist (talk)04:45, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thus the simulation world hypothesis, not only it doesn't add more to the physical foundations conundrum, but also needlessly makes it less causal, because even the worlds which produce simulations cannot escape from their foundational cause, which at some deeper degree has to be physical. Physics remains an important issue, because its foundations are informational (see: information theory), but without the need of someone playing tricks on us. That speculation adds no genuine complexity and actually it erroneously tries to keep unanswered questions regarding foundational causality.
Because thealien origin of earthling life hypothesis like the simulation world hypothesis transfer a causal issue to a different causal layer, but without to manage the causal layer, layers or infinite layers.
The Big Bang destroyed everything, even if we support cyclic theories of cosmology (not only one exists). Thus some alien civilization would have to be the first one, and we simply transfer the origin of life/abiogenesis from chemistry conundrum to that world. see: Jack W. Szostak on YouTube
Time travel and wormholes don't work for humans (and for human-sized objects - wormholes can be an interpretation of Planck-size[d] phenomena) who want to stay alive. see: Sabine Hossenfelder on YouTube
