IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/sysdyn/v32y2016i1p26-51.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Structural dominance analysis of large and stochastic models

Author

Listed:
  • Rogelio Oliva

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Rogelio Oliva, 2016. "Structural dominance analysis of large and stochastic models," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 32(1), pages 26-51, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:sysdyn:v:32:y:2016:i:1:p:26-51
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1002/sdr.1549
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. Ignacio J. Martinez-Moyano & David P. McCaffrey & Rogelio Oliva, 2014. "Drift and Adjustment in Organizational Rule Compliance: Explaining the “Regulatory Pendulum” in Financial Markets," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(2), pages 321-338, April.
    2. Saleh, Mohamed & Oliva, Rogelio & Kampmann, Christian Erik & Davidsen, Pål I., 2010. "A comprehensive analytical approach for policy analysis of system dynamics models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 203(3), pages 673-683, June.
    3. Oliva, Rogelio, 2003. "Model calibration as a testing strategy for system dynamics models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(3), pages 552-568, December.
    4. Rogelio Oliva & John D. Sterman, 2001. "Cutting Corners and Working Overtime: Quality Erosion in the Service Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(7), pages 894-914, July.
    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. William Schoenberg & John Hayward & Robert Eberlein, 2023. "Improving Loops that Matter," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 39(2), pages 140-151, April.
    2. Deuten, Sebastiaan & Gómez Vilchez, Jonatan J. & Thiel, Christian, 2020. "Analysis and testing of electric car incentive scenarios in the Netherlands and Norway," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    3. Lane, David C. & Rouwette, Etiënne A.J.A., 2023. "Towards a behavioural system dynamics: Exploring its scope and delineating its promise," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 306(2), pages 777-794.
    4. Chulwook Park, 2020. "Interconnected Conditions of Homogeneous and Heterogeneous Behavior in Agent-Based Models- Matrix with Calculated Vectors," Biomedical Journal of Scientific & Technical Research, Biomedical Research Network+, LLC, vol. 25(4), pages 19333-19341, February.
    5. William Schoenberg & Pål Davidsen & Robert Eberlein, 2020. "Understanding model behavior using the Loops that Matter method," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 36(2), pages 158-190, April.
    6. Turner, Benjamin L., 2020. "Model laboratories: A quick-start guide for design of simulation experiments for dynamic systems models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 434(C).
    7. Khalid Saeed & Jack Homer & David Lane & Erling Moxnes & John Sterman & The Jay Forrester Award Committee, 2020. "The 29th Jay Wright Forrester Award," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 36(1), pages 5-7, January.
    8. Edward G. Anderson & David R. Keith & Jose Lopez, 2023. "Opportunities for system dynamics research in operations management for public policy," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(6), pages 1895-1920, June.
    9. Abram, Joseph J. & Dyke, James G., 2018. "Structural Loop Analysis of Complex Ecological Systems," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 333-342.
    10. Rogelio Oliva, 2020. "On structural dominance analysis," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 36(1), pages 8-28, January.
    11. Chulwook Park, 2019. "Network and Agent Dynamics with Evolving Protection against Systemic Risk," Papers 1907.11622, arXiv.org.
    12. John Sterman, 2018. "System dynamics at sixty: the path forward," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 34(1-2), pages 5-47, January.

    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. Rogelio Oliva, 2020. "On structural dominance analysis," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 36(1), pages 8-28, January.
    2. Jair Andrade & Jim Duggan, 2021. "A Bayesian approach to calibrate system dynamics models using Hamiltonian Monte Carlo," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 37(4), pages 283-309, October.
    3. Navid Ghaffarzadegan & Richard C. Larson, 2018. "SD meets OR: a new synergy to address policy problems," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 34(1-2), pages 327-353, January.
    4. Armenia, Stefano & Franco, Eduardo & Iandolo, Francesca & Maielli, Giuliano & Vito, Pietro, 2024. "Zooming in and out the landscape: Artificial intelligence and system dynamics in business and management," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    5. Federico Cosenz & Guido Noto, 2016. "Applying System Dynamics Modelling to Strategic Management: A Literature Review," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(6), pages 703-741, November.
    6. Udenio, Maximiliano & Fransoo, Jan C. & Peels, Robert, 2015. "Destocking, the bullwhip effect, and the credit crisis: Empirical modeling of supply chain dynamics," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 34-46.
    7. Vincent de Gooyert, 2019. "Developing dynamic organizational theories; three system dynamics based research strategies," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(2), pages 653-666, March.
    8. David Jancsics & Salvador Espinosa & Jonathan Carlos, 2023. "Organizational noncompliance: an interdisciplinary review of social and organizational factors," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 73(3), pages 1273-1301, September.
    9. Muel Kaptein, 2023. "A Paradox of Ethics: Why People in Good Organizations do Bad Things," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 184(1), pages 297-316, April.
    10. Oliva, Rogelio, 2003. "Model calibration as a testing strategy for system dynamics models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(3), pages 552-568, December.
    11. Hazhir Rahmandad & Nelson Repenning, 2016. "Capability erosion dynamics," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 649-672, April.
    12. Yu, Shiwei & Wei, Yi-ming, 2012. "Prediction of China's coal production-environmental pollution based on a hybrid genetic algorithm-system dynamics model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 521-529.
    13. Masha Shunko & Julie Niederhoff & Yaroslav Rosokha, 2018. "Humans Are Not Machines: The Behavioral Impact of Queueing Design on Service Time," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(1), pages 453-473, January.
    14. Vasiliki Kostami & Sampath Rajagopalan, 2014. "Speed–Quality Trade-Offs in a Dynamic Model," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 16(1), pages 104-118, February.
    15. Mirko Kremer & Francis de Véricourt, 2022. "Mismanaging diagnostic accuracy under congestion," ESMT Research Working Papers ESMT-22-01, ESMT European School of Management and Technology.
    16. Francesco Tonini & Francesco Davide Sanvito & Fabrizio Colombelli & Emanuela Colombo, 2022. "Improving Sustainable Access to Electricity in Rural Tanzania: A System Dynamics Approach to the Matembwe Village," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-17, March.
    17. Maria R. Ibanez & Michael W. Toffel, 2020. "How Scheduling Can Bias Quality Assessment: Evidence from Food-Safety Inspections," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(6), pages 2396-2416, June.
    18. Ryan W. Buell & Michael I. Norton, 2011. "The Labor Illusion: How Operational Transparency Increases Perceived Value," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(9), pages 1564-1579, February.
    19. Delasay, Mohammad & Ingolfsson, Armann & Kolfal, Bora & Schultz, Kenneth, 2019. "Load effect on service times," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 279(3), pages 673-686.
    20. Bob Walrave, 2016. "Determining intervention thresholds that change output behavior patterns," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 32(3-4), pages 261-278, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bla:sysdyn:v:32:y:2016:i:1:p:26-51. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/0883-7066 .

    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.