IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/joudef/v21y2024i2p229-243.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Simulation analysis of applicant scheduling and processing alternatives at a military entrance processing station

Author

Listed:
  • Phillip M LaCasse
  • Lance E Champagne
  • Jonathan M Escamilla

Abstract

Eligibility for enlistment into the US military is assessed by the United States Military Entrance Processing Command (USMEPCOM), an independent agency that reports to the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and not to any specific branch of military service. This research develops a discrete-event simulation for applicant processing operations at a Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS) to investigate the viability of potential alternatives to the current applicant arrival and processing operation. Currently, all applicants arrive to the MEPS at the beginning of the processing day in a single batch. This research models and compares two alternatives with the status quo: split-shift processing, by which applicant arrivals occur in two batches: one at 06:00 and one at 11:00 and appointment-based processing, by which applicants may arrive during one of three, four, six, or eight appointment windows. Express-lane processing is also explored, in which applicants are allowed to bypass select processing stations. Experimental results indicate that split-shift processing is not viable under the current processing model due to an unacceptable decrease in applicant throughput. Results from appointment-based scenarios are mixed, with the critical factors being the time between appointment batches and their associated arrival times.

Suggested Citation

  • Phillip M LaCasse & Lance E Champagne & Jonathan M Escamilla, 2024. "Simulation analysis of applicant scheduling and processing alternatives at a military entrance processing station," The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation, , vol. 21(2), pages 229-243, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:joudef:v:21:y:2024:i:2:p:229-243
    DOI: 10.1177/15485129221134536
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/15485129221134536
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/15485129221134536?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. Suresh K Damodaran & Neal Wagner, 2020. "Modeling and simulation to support cyber defense," The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation, , vol. 17(1), pages 3-4, January.
    2. Paul Glasserman & David D. Yao, 1992. "Some Guidelines and Guarantees for Common Random Numbers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(6), pages 884-908, June.
    3. Lee A Evans & Ki-Hwan G Bae, 2019. "US Army performance appraisal policy analysis: a simulation optimization approach," The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation, , vol. 16(2), pages 191-205, April.
    4. Jun Wang, 2020. "Path and policy analyses: a sustainability study of military workforce supply chains," The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation, , vol. 17(4), pages 389-397, October.
    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. Michael C. Fu & Jian-Qiang Hu & Chun-Hung Chen & Xiaoping Xiong, 2007. "Simulation Allocation for Determining the Best Design in the Presence of Correlated Sampling," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 19(1), pages 101-111, February.
    2. N. Hilber & N. Reich & C. Schwab & C. Winter, 2009. "Numerical methods for Lévy processes," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 471-500, September.
    3. Nathan L. Kleinman & James C. Spall & Daniel Q. Naiman, 1999. "Simulation-Based Optimization with Stochastic Approximation Using Common Random Numbers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(11), pages 1570-1578, November.
    4. Boyle, Phelim & Broadie, Mark & Glasserman, Paul, 1997. "Monte Carlo methods for security pricing," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 21(8-9), pages 1267-1321, June.
    5. Dag Kolsrud, 2008. "Stochastic Ceteris Paribus Simulations," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 31(1), pages 21-43, February.
    6. Guillaume Bernis & Emmanuel Gobet & Arturo Kohatsu‐Higa, 2003. "Monte Carlo Evaluation of Greeks for Multidimensional Barrier and Lookback Options," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(1), pages 99-113, January.
    7. Benhamou, Eric, 2000. "A generalisation of Malliavin weighted scheme for fast computation of the Greeks," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 119105, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Eric Benhamou, 2000. "A Generalisation of Malliavin Weighted Scheme for Fast Computation of the Greeks," FMG Discussion Papers dp350, Financial Markets Group.
    9. Turan, Hasan Hüseyin & Jalalvand, Fatemeh & Elsawah, Sondoss & Ryan, Michael J., 2022. "A joint problem of strategic workforce planning and fleet renewal: With an application in defense," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 296(2), pages 615-634.
    10. Shuowen Chen, 2022. "Indirect Inference for Nonlinear Panel Models with Fixed Effects," Papers 2203.10683, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2022.
    11. Davis, Mark H.A. & Johansson, Martin P., 2006. "Malliavin Monte Carlo Greeks for jump diffusions," Stochastic Processes and their Applications, Elsevier, vol. 116(1), pages 101-129, January.
    12. Sheldon H. Jacobson & Enver Yücesan, 1999. "On the Complexity of Verifying Structural Properties of Discrete Event Simulation Models," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 47(3), pages 476-481, June.
    13. Andrea Maria Zanchettin, 2022. "Robust scheduling and dispatching rules for high-mix collaborative manufacturing systems," Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 293-316, June.
    14. Angel A. Juan & Peter Keenan & Rafael Martí & Seán McGarraghy & Javier Panadero & Paula Carroll & Diego Oliva, 2023. "A review of the role of heuristics in stochastic optimisation: from metaheuristics to learnheuristics," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 320(2), pages 831-861, January.
    15. Saif, Ahmed & Elhedhli, Samir, 2016. "Cold supply chain design with environmental considerations: A simulation-optimization approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 251(1), pages 274-287.
    16. Marvin K. Nakayama & Perwez Shahabuddin, 1998. "Likelihood Ratio Derivative Estimation for Finite-Time Performance Measures in Generalized Semi-Markov Processes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(10), pages 1426-1441, October.
    17. Jiajie Kong & Robert Lund, 2023. "Seasonal count time series," Journal of Time Series Analysis, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(1), pages 93-124, January.
    18. Chih, Mingchang, 2023. "Stochastic stability analysis of particle swarm optimization with pseudo random number assignment strategy," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 305(2), pages 562-593.
    19. Chaudhuri, Anirban & Kramer, Boris & Willcox, Karen E., 2020. "Information Reuse for Importance Sampling in Reliability-Based Design Optimization," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    20. B. Heidergott & F. J. Vázquez-Abad, 2008. "Measure-Valued Differentiation for Markov Chains," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 136(2), pages 187-209, February.

    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:21:y:2024:i:2:p:229-243. 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.