Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 128 references

Artificial Intelligence and Modeling & Simulation: An Overview

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read A two-way map of AI and simulation, stage by stage, from assistant to full replacement.

desk verdict A competent, honest survey of AI–M&S that organizes the field along pipeline stages and AI roles; no new results, but the framing is sound and the limitations are mostly acknowledged. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.00366 v1 pith:NUY6KFB3 submitted 2026-08-01 cs.SE cs.AI

Niclas Feldkamp , Philippe J. Giabbanelli , Istvan David This is my paper
classification cs.SEcs.AI
keywords artificialintelligencemodelingandsimulationlargelanguagemodelsgenerativeAIpipelinemetamodelingdigitaltwinsagent-based
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This report gives a structured map of the growing intersection between artificial intelligence and modeling & simulation. Its central claim is that the relationship runs in both directions: AI can support, augment, or replace parts of a simulation study, while simulations can supply data, training environments, and evaluation platforms for AI. The map has two axes: the stages of an M&S study (from problem formulation through conceptual modeling, implementation, execution, experimentation, verification and validation, to result analysis) and a continuum of AI roles from assistant to integrated component to near-complete replacement. The report argues that this influence is not merely incremental but potentially transformative, expanding the methodological toolkit of the field and reshaping what it means to be a simulation scientist.

What carries the argument

A two-dimensional classification scheme: (1) the M&S pipeline stages shown in Figure 1, from problem formulation and requirements engineering through conceptual modeling, design, implementation, execution, experimentation, verification and validation, to presentation; and (2) a continuum of AI roles in Figure 2, running from 'user retains full control' through AI as assistant, AI as integrated runtime component, to full delegation or replacement. The scheme's work is to place surveyed studies within this matrix, which then supports maturity and value judgments (Figure 3) and the report's claim that AI's influence on M&S is potentially transformative rather than incremental.

What would settle it

A reproducible audit would compile AI-and-M&S papers from a defined period, place each study in the report's stage-by-stage, role-by-role matrix, and measure the share that fits no cell; a large residual share would falsify the organizing claim. A second audit would compare the report's Figure 3 maturity and value rankings against adoption rates and reported success in the literature.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Organizing the AI–M&S landscape along the stages of a simulation study reveals that AI techniques are not used uniformly: they concentrate where text processing helps (conceptual modeling, code generation, reporting) or where data-driven approximation helps (input modeling, metamodeling, output analysis). Against the stage axis, AI's role can range from an assistant that leaves the modeler in control, to an integrated component that becomes part of the model's logic, to a near-complete replacement of the model or modeler. The report also establishes the reverse direction as equally central: simulations act as data generators for offline training, as interactive environments for reinforcement

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the studies the report selected are representative enough of the AI–M&S field as a whole; with a different set of examples, the stage-by-stage map and the maturity judgments could look different.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Text-heavy stages are the near-term winners: LLM-based conceptual modeling, code generation, debugging, and report generation are already feasible, while fully automatic statistical analysis of results remains unreliable because LLMs struggle with advanced quantitative reasoning.
  • Metamodeling is the mature workhorse of AI in M&S, but only when the surrogate's training and tuning costs are outweighed by saved simulation runs — a project-level trade-off, not a blanket win.
  • The most dynamic research area is AI inside the running model, especially generative agents whose learned behavior replaces hand-coded rules; this raises open questions about the validity of results from such AI-in-the-loop models.
  • Simulation's role as a safe training and evaluation ground for AI will grow, with digital twins turning simulators into cyber-physical environments where reinforcement-learning agents can be trained and tested before deployment.
  • The net effect the report expects is disciplinary: M&S gains an expanding toolkit, and what it means to be a simulation scientist shifts toward data- and AI-literate practice.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The stage-by-stage matrix could double as a gap map: cells with few examples, such as AI-assisted validation of simulation models or fully automatic result analysis, mark where the next wave of research will likely land — a reading the report hints at but does not systematically quantify.
  • A testable extension would be to mine publication metadata and count how studies distribute across the matrix over time; a shift in density toward the replacement end of the role continuum would corroborate the 'transformative' claim.
  • The report's cost–benefit framing implies an implicit decision rule for practitioners: choose AI when data volume or distribution complexity is high and when interpretability and control can be traded, and stick with classical statistical methods in simpler settings. The paper leaves this rule implicit rather than formalizing it.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper is an overview/review of the intersections between artificial intelligence and modeling & simulation (M&S). It organizes the landscape along two orthogonal dimensions: the stages of a simulation study (Figure 1) and a continuum of AI roles from user assistance to full delegation (Figure 2). The main body surveys AI support for model specification, input modeling, implementation, simulation execution, experimentation, verification & validation, and result analysis, with examples drawn from recent literature, especially LLMs and generative models. It then reverses the direction and discusses how simulation supports AI as a data generator, a training environment (including digital twins), and an evaluation platform. The final section presents a maturity-versus-value map (Figure 3) and argues that the influence of AI on M&S is "potentially transformative." The paper is explicitly a selective, non-systematic overview rather than an empirical study.

Significance. If accepted, the paper provides a useful conceptual roadmap for a rapidly evolving field. Its strengths are the clear articulation of the bidirectional AI–M&S relationship, the role-continuum framing, careful attribution of examples to primary sources, and a balanced treatment of limitations (e.g., resource consumption, black-box interpretability, education, and the risk of over-reliance on LLMs). The paper does not pretend to be exhaustive and includes several explicit caveats. However, because the selection of examples is not systematic, the frequency/maturity claims in Section 4 are weaker than the surrounding language suggests. The central organizational claim is defensible and independently checkable, but the internal taxonomy needs tightening.

major comments (3)
  1. [Figure 1 vs. Sections 2.1–2.7] Figure 1 defines an eight-stage pipeline (problem formulation, requirements engineering, conceptual modeling, design & parameterization, implementation, experimentation/use, V&V, presentation), but the narrative sections use a different segmentation: model specification, input modeling, implementation, simulation execution, conducting experiments, V&V, and result analysis. The front end is collapsed into "model specification" without explaining how problem formulation, requirements, conceptual modeling, and design map into it, and "presentation" is effectively replaced by "result analysis." Since the paper's central claim is to organize the landscape along the stages of M&S, the stage list used in the text should match the diagram or the mapping should be made explicit.
  2. [Sections 2.3–2.4 and Figure 2] The boundary between "implementation" and "simulation execution" is inconsistent. In §2.3, an AI model integrated into a simulation model at runtime (the Woerrlein and Strassburger power-consumption predictor) is classified under implementation, while §2.4 classifies an AI that is "integrated even more deeply" into the model's process logic (Bergmann et al., generative agents) under simulation execution. Figure 2 places "AI integrated in the simulation to control model behavior" under simulation execution, not implementation. The distinguishing criterion is unclear; a reader cannot determine where runtime-embedded AI belongs. Please define the boundary (e.g., whether the AI is required for the model to execute versus used to construct or render the model) and either move the example or revise Figure 2.
  3. [Section 4 and Figure 3] The maturity and frequency claims in Section 4—"AI approaches for the validation of simulation models are still relatively rare," the placement of approaches on a maturity axis in Figure 3, and the conclusion that the influence of AI is "potentially transformative"—are presented as observations but are not backed by a systematic search or inclusion protocol. Section 4 itself states the overview "was not intended to be exhaustive," which creates tension with these claims. Please either reframe them explicitly as author perspectives/hypotheses (with qualifiers such as "in the studies we selected"), or add a search and inclusion protocol that supports the frequency and maturity assertions.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract] "Selected studies at each stage illustrates" should be "illustrate."
  2. [Section 2.5] "experimental deigns" is a typo for "designs."
  3. [Section 4] "Finaly" should be "Finally."
  4. [Figure 2] The horizontal axis from "User retains full control" to "Fully delegate control to AI" is presented as a continuum, but the example positions appear illustrative rather than measured. A note saying the placements are schematic would prevent over-interpretation.
  5. [Section 2.1] The sentence "we do not use their knowledge" when discussing AI as translators is potentially misleading, since LLMs always use their parametric knowledge during inference. Clarify that the knowledge used for the model content is confined to the provided input (or traceable to it), rather than the model's internal knowledge.
  6. [General / Section 4] Many illustrative examples come from the authors' own prior work. Given the selective nature of the review, a brief statement in Section 4 (or an acknowledgment) about the selection rationale and the potential for author bias would improve transparency.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper's organizational thesis is a framing claim supported by external examples, not a derivation that reduces to its inputs.

full rationale

This is an overview/position paper, not a formal derivation, so the standard circularity patterns (self-definitional equations, fitted inputs called predictions, uniqueness theorems, ansatz-by-citation) do not apply. The central claim—that AI can support/augment/replace components of M&S and that simulations can serve AI as data generators, training environments, and evaluation platforms—is a taxonomy/framing claim, not a frequency or predictive claim. The M&S pipeline stages in Figure 1 are explicitly grounded in prior external literature (Tolk [112]; related views by Sargent [102] and Balci [4]), and the role continuum in Figure 2 is defined conceptually rather than derived from data. Where the authors cite their own prior work (e.g., [40], [42], [52], [54], [74], [119], [120]), it is used as illustrative examples or as a prior literature study, not as the sole justification for a load-bearing conclusion. Section 4's maturity observations are explicitly qualified: 'This overview was not intended to be exhaustive, nor to suggest that these approaches are uniformly mature or widely adopted,' and are presented as perspectives/observations, not as systematic empirical results. The only substantive limitation is representativeness/selection of examples, which the paper acknowledges; that is a correctness/coverage concern, not circularity. No equation or fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no conclusion is forced by a self-citation chain. Therefore, the derivation chain (such as it is) is self-contained, and no specific circular step can be exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 2 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No equations or empirical parameters are used. The report rests on domain-taxonomy assumptions and on the representativeness of the selected examples, both of which are qualitative and not independently established.

assumptions (2)
  • domain assumption The staged M&S pipeline in Figure 1 is a valid decomposition of modeling and simulation studies.
    The taxonomy organizes the entire paper. It aligns with prior frameworks such as Sargent [102] and Balci [4], but the choice of stages is an assumption that shapes all subsequent categorization.
  • ad hoc to paper The cited selected studies are representative of the broader literature at each stage.
    The paper explicitly relies on 'selected studies' without systematic selection criteria. Representativeness is therefore assumed rather than demonstrated.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Artificial Intelligence and Modeling & Simulation: An Overview." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NUY6KFB3

@misc{pith2026260800366,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Artificial Intelligence and Modeling & Simulation: An Overview},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NUY6KFB3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.00366}
}
read the original abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) and Modeling & Simulation (M&S) are increasingly intertwined, reflecting converging research needs across both communities, rapid technological advances such as the rise of generative AI, and the growing availability of data and computational resources. This report provides a structured overview of the intersections of AI and M&S. The relationship goes both ways: AI can support, augment, or even replace components of simulation studies, while simulations can serve as data generators, training environments, and evaluation platforms for AI. We organize this landscape along the stages of M&S from model specification and input modeling to execution, experimentation, verification and validation, and output analysis. Selected studies at each stage illustrates how techniques such as Large Language Models have reshaped simulation practices, while highlighting limitations and open challenges. This report also provides a conceptual roadmap that helps readers navigate a rapidly changing ecosystem.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.00366 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Pipeline of a modeling and simulation study. We omit transitions that go back [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Roles that AI can play across the M&S stages (defined in figure 1, arranged [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Landscape of artificial intelligence applications in modeling and simulation, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

128 extracted references · 68 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Generative ai and simulation modeling: how should you (not) use large language models like chatgpt.System Dynamics Review, 40(3):e1773, 2024

    Ali Akhavan and Mohammad S Jalali. Generative ai and simulation modeling: how should you (not) use large language models like chatgpt.System Dynamics Review, 40(3):e1773, 2024

    2024

  2. [2]

    interest-holders

    Elie A Akl, Joanne Khabsa, Jennifer Petkovic, Olivia Magwood, Lyubov Lytvyn, Ashley Motilall, Pauline Campbell, Alex Todhunter-Brown, Holger J Sch¨ unemann, Vivian Welch, et al. “interest-holders”: A new term to replace “stakeholders” in the context of health research and policy.Cochrane Evidence Synthesis and Methods, 2(11):e70007, 2024

    2024

  3. [3]

    Variational autoencoder based anomaly de- tection using reconstruction probability.Special lecture on IE, 2(1):1–18, 2015

    Jinwon An and Sungzoon Cho. Variational autoencoder based anomaly de- tection using reconstruction probability.Special lecture on IE, 2(1):1–18, 2015

    2015

  4. [4]

    A life cycle for modeling and simulation.Simulation, 88(7): 870–883, 2012

    Osman Balci. A life cycle for modeling and simulation.Simulation, 88(7): 870–883, 2012

    2012

  5. [5]

    Constructing enterprise digital twins by augmenting llms with mde

    Souvik Barat, Dushyanthi Mulpuru, Abhishek Yadav, Reshma Korabu, Himabindu Thogaru, and Vinay Kulkarni. Constructing enterprise digital twins by augmenting llms with mde. InProceedings of the 18th Innovations in Software Engineering Conference, pages 1–11, 2025

    2025

  6. [6]

    Explainable artificial intelligence (xai): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible ai.Information fusion, 58:82–115, 2020

    Alejandro Barredo Arrieta, Natalia D ´ıaz-Rodr´ıguez, Javier Del Ser, Adrien Bennetot, Siham Tabik, Alberto Barbado, Salvador Garc´ıa, Sergio Gil-L´opez, Daniel Molina, Richard Benjamins, et al. Explainable artificial intelligence (xai): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible ai.Information fusion, 58:82–115, 2020

    2020

  7. [7]

    Simulation optimization using metamodels

    Russell R Barton. Simulation optimization using metamodels. InProceedings of the 2009 winter simulation conference (WSC), pages 230–238. IEEE, 2009

    2009

  8. [8]

    A scoping review of three dimensions for long-term covid-19 vaccination models: hybrid immunity, individual drivers of vaccinal choice, and human errors.Vaccines, 10(10):1716, 2022

    Jack T Beerman, Gwendal G Beaumont, and Philippe J Giabbanelli. A scoping review of three dimensions for long-term covid-19 vaccination models: hybrid immunity, individual drivers of vaccinal choice, and human errors.Vaccines, 10(10):1716, 2022. AI and M&S: An Overview 25

    2022

Show all 128 references
  1. [9]

    Real-to-sim: automatic simulation model generation for a digital twin in semiconductor manufacturing.Journal of Intelligent Manu- facturing, pages 1–20, 2025

    Sebastian Behrendt, Thomas Altenm¨ uller, Marvin Carl May, Andreas Kuhnle, and Gisela Lanza. Real-to-sim: automatic simulation model generation for a digital twin in semiconductor manufacturing.Journal of Intelligent Manu- facturing, pages 1–20, 2025

    2025

  2. [10]

    Approximation of dispatching rules for manufacturing simulation using data mining methods

    Soeren Bergmann, Niclas Feldkamp, and Steffen Strassburger. Approximation of dispatching rules for manufacturing simulation using data mining methods. In2015 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC), pages 2329–2340. IEEE, 2015

    2015

  3. [11]

    Integrating artificial intelligence into sce- nario analysis: A validated framework for strategic planning under economic uncertainty.Global Economics Research, page 100007, 2025

    Gabriela Bessa and Belem Barbosa. Integrating artificial intelligence into sce- nario analysis: A validated framework for strategic planning under economic uncertainty.Global Economics Research, page 100007, 2025

    2025

  4. [12]

    Springer, 2006

    Christopher M Bishop.Pattern recognition and machine learning, volume 4. Springer, 2006

    2006

  5. [13]

    The role of modeling in the analysis and design of sustainable systems: a panel report.Communications of the Associ- ation for Information Systems, 54:911–936, 2024

    Dominik Bork, Istvan David, Sergio Espa˜na, Giancarlo Guizzardi, Henderik A Proper, and Iris Reinhartz-Berger. The role of modeling in the analysis and design of sustainable systems: a panel report.Communications of the Associ- ation for Information Systems, 54:911–936, 2024

    2024

  6. [14]

    J. G. Botello, B. Illinas, J. J. Padilla, and E. Frydenlund. Toward automating system dynamics modeling: Evaluating llms in the transition from narratives to formal structures. InProceedings of the 2025 Winter Simulation Conference, pages 2380–2391, Seattle, WA, USA, December 2025

    2025

  7. [15]

    Language models are few-shot learners.Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:1877–1901, 2020

    Tom Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah, Jared D Ka- plan, Prafulla Dhariwal, Arvind Neelakantan, Pranav Shyam, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, et al. Language models are few-shot learners.Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:1877–1901, 2020

    1901

  8. [16]

    Extracting training data from large language models

    Nicholas Carlini, Florian Tramer, Eric Wallace, Matthew Jagielski, Ariel Herbert-Voss, Katherine Lee, Adam Roberts, Tom Brown, Dawn Song, Ulfar Erlingsson, et al. Extracting training data from large language models. In 30th USENIX security symposium (USENIX Security 21), pages...

    2021

  9. [17]

    Generating business process models with open source large language models using in- struction tuning

    G ¨okberk C ¸ elikmasat, Atay¨Ozg¨ovde, and Fatma Bas ¸ak Aydemir. Generating business process models with open source large language models using in- struction tuning. InInternational Conference on Product-Focused Software Process Improvement, pages 269–284. Springer, 2025

    2025

  10. [18]

    Enhanced simulation metamodeling via graph and generative neural networks

    Wang Cen and Peter J Haas. Enhanced simulation metamodeling via graph and generative neural networks. In2022 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC), pages 2748–2759. IEEE, 2022

    2022

  11. [19]

    Nim: generative neural networks for automated modeling and generation of simulation inputs.ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation, 33(3):1–26, 2023

    Wang Cen and Peter J Haas. Nim: generative neural networks for automated modeling and generation of simulation inputs.ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation, 33(3):1–26, 2023

    2023

  12. [20]

    Nim: modeling and generation of simulation inputs via generative neural networks

    Wang Cen, Emily A Herbert, and Peter J Haas. Nim: modeling and generation of simulation inputs via generative neural networks. In2020 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC), pages 584–595. IEEE, 2020

    2020

  13. [21]

    Learning agent-based modeling with llm companions: Expe- riences of novices and experts using chatgpt & netlogo chat

    John Chen, Xi Lu, Yuzhou Du, Michael Rejtig, Ruth Bagley, Mike Horn, and Uri Wilensky. Learning agent-based modeling with llm companions: Expe- riences of novices and experts using chatgpt & netlogo chat. InProceedings 26 Niclas Feldkamp, Philippe J. Giabbanelli, Istvan David ...

    2024

  14. [22]

    S-nerf++: Autonomous driving simulation via neural reconstruction and generation.IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 2025

    Yurui Chen, Junge Zhang, Ziyang Xie, Wenye Li, Feihu Zhang, Jiachen Lu, and Li Zhang. S-nerf++: Autonomous driving simulation via neural reconstruction and generation.IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 2025

    2025

  15. [23]

    Good models borrow, great models steal: intellectual property rights and generative ai.Policy and Society, 44(1):23–37, 2025

    Simon Chesterman. Good models borrow, great models steal: intellectual property rights and generative ai.Policy and Society, 44(1):23–37, 2025

    2025

  16. [24]

    Classification of system dynamics model outputs using decision trees.Machine Learning with Appli- cations, page 100713, 2025

    Martina Curran, Enda Howley, and Jim Duggan. Classification of system dynamics model outputs using decision trees.Machine Learning with Appli- cations, page 100713, 2025

    2025

  17. [25]

    Structured validation of ai-based systems by virtual testing in simulated test scenarios.Applied Intelligence, 53(15):18910–18924, 2023

    Ulrich Dahmen, Tobias Osterloh, and J¨ urgen Roßmann. Structured validation of ai-based systems by virtual testing in simulated test scenarios.Applied Intelligence, 53(15):18910–18924, 2023

    2023

  18. [27]

    Infonomics of autonomous digital twins

    Istvan David and Dominik Bork. Infonomics of autonomous digital twins. In Advanced Information Systems Engineering, volume 14663 ofLecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 563–578. Springer, 2024. ISBN 978-3-031- 61057-8. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-61057-8 33

    2024 doi

  19. [28]

    DEVS Model Construction as a Reinforcement Learning Problem

    Istvan David and Eugene Syriani. DEVS Model Construction as a Reinforcement Learning Problem. In2022 Annual Modeling and Simulation Conference (ANNSIM), pages 30–41. IEEE, 2022. doi: 10.23919/ANNSIM55834.2022.9859369

    2022

  20. [29]

    CRC Press, 2024

    Istvan David and Eugene Syriani.Automated Inference of Simulators in Digi- tal Twins, chapter 8, pages 122–148. CRC Press, 2024. ISBN 9781032546070. doi: 10.1201/9781003425724-11

    2024 doi

  21. [30]

    Digi- tal twins for cyber-biophysical systems: Challenges and lessons learned

    Istvan David, Pascal Archambault, Quentin Wolak, Cong Vinh Vu, Tim- oth´e Lalonde, Kashif Riaz, Eugene Syriani, and Houari Sahraoui. Digi- tal twins for cyber-biophysical systems: Challenges and lessons learned. In 2023 ACM/IEEE 26th International Conference on Model Driven En...

    2023

  22. [31]

    Auto- matically generating scenarios from a text corpus: A case study on electric vehicles.Sustainability, 14(13):7938, 2022

    Christopher WH Davis, Antonie J Jetter, and Philippe J Giabbanelli. Auto- matically generating scenarios from a text corpus: A case study on electric vehicles.Sustainability, 14(13):7938, 2022

    2022

  23. [32]

    Towards an automatic construction of simulation scenarios: A systematic review

    Christopher WH Davis, Antonie J Jetter, and Philippe J Giabbanelli. Towards an automatic construction of simulation scenarios: A systematic review. In 2023 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC), pages 2494–2505. IEEE, 2023

    2023

  24. [33]

    Metamodeling a system dynamics model: a contemporary comparison of methods

    Rodrigo De la Fuente and Raymond Smith. Metamodeling a system dynamics model: a contemporary comparison of methods. In2017 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC), pages 1926–1937. IEEE, 2017. AI and M&S: An Overview 27

    1926

  25. [34]

    Modeling input processes with johnson distributions

    David J DeBrota, Robert S Dittus, James J Swain, Stephen D Roberts, and James R Wilson. Modeling input processes with johnson distributions. In Proceedings of the 21st conference on winter simulation, pages 308–318, 1989

    1989

  26. [35]

    Agent-based modeling in electrical energy markets using dynamic bayesian networks.IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 31(6):4744–4754, 2016

    Kaveh Dehghanpour, M Hashem Nehrir, John W Sheppard, and Nathan C Kelly. Agent-based modeling in electrical energy markets using dynamic bayesian networks.IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 31(6):4744–4754, 2016

    2016

  27. [36]

    Realgen: Retrieval augmented generation for controllable traffic scenarios

    Wenhao Ding, Yulong Cao, Ding Zhao, Chaowei Xiao, and Marco Pavone. Realgen: Retrieval augmented generation for controllable traffic scenarios. In European Conference on Computer Vision, pages 93–110. Springer, 2024

    2024

  28. [37]

    Ai usefulness in systems mod- elling and simulation: Gpt-4 application.South African Journal of Industrial Engineering, 34(3):286–303, 2023

    Corne du Plooy and Rudolph Oosthuizen. Ai usefulness in systems mod- elling and simulation: Gpt-4 application.South African Journal of Industrial Engineering, 34(3):286–303, 2023

    2023

  29. [38]

    Ibm scenario planning advisor: a neuro- symbolic erm solution

    Mark Feblowitz, Oktie Hassanzadeh, Michael Katz, Shirin Sohrabi, Kavitha Srinivas, and Octavian Udrea. Ibm scenario planning advisor: a neuro- symbolic erm solution. InProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 35, pages 16032–16034, 2021

    2021

  30. [39]

    Application of machine learning within hybrid systems modelling

    Niclas Feldkamp. Application of machine learning within hybrid systems modelling. InHybrid modeling and simulation: conceptualizations, methods and applications, pages 159–183. Springer, 2024

    2024

  31. [40]

    On the use of generative ai in simulation studies: A review of techniques, applications and opportunities

    Niclas Feldkamp. On the use of generative ai in simulation studies: A review of techniques, applications and opportunities. InProceedings of the 2025 Winter Simulation Conference, 2025

    2025

  32. [41]

    Knowledge discovery in simulation data.ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation (TOMACS), 30(4):1–25, 2020

    Niclas Feldkamp, Soeren Bergmann, and Steffen Strassburger. Knowledge discovery in simulation data.ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation (TOMACS), 30(4):1–25, 2020

    2020

  33. [42]

    A method using generative adversarial networks for robustness optimization.ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation (TOMACS), 32(2):1–22, 2022

    Niclas Feldkamp, Soeren Bergmann, Florian Conrad, and Steffen Strass- burger. A method using generative adversarial networks for robustness optimization.ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation (TOMACS), 32(2):1–22, 2022

    2022

  34. [43]

    Explainable ai for data farming output analysis: a use case for knowledge generation through black-box classifiers

    Niclas Feldkamp, Jonas Genath, and Steffen Strassburger. Explainable ai for data farming output analysis: a use case for knowledge generation through black-box classifiers. In2022 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC), pages 1152–1163. IEEE, 2022

    2022

  35. [44]

    Agent-based modelling meets generative ai in social network simulations

    Antonino Ferraro, Antonio Galli, Valerio La Gatta, Marco Postiglione, Gian Marco Orlando, Diego Russo, Giuseppe Riccio, Antonio Romano, and Vincenzo Moscato. Agent-based modelling meets generative ai in social network simulations. InInternational Conference on Advances in Soci...

    2024

  36. [45]

    Using llms to support teachers infusing system dynamics con- cepts in high school curricula

    Diana Fisher. Using llms to support teachers infusing system dynamics con- cepts in high school curricula. InProceedings of the International System Dynamics Conference, Boston, MA, USA, August 2025. ISBN 978-1-935056- 33-1. 28 Niclas Feldkamp, Philippe J. Giabbanelli, Istvan David

    2025

  37. [46]

    Can large language models learn conceptual modeling by looking at slide decks and pass graduate exami- nations? an empirical study

    No ´e Y Flandre and Philippe J Giabbanelli. Can large language models learn conceptual modeling by looking at slide decks and pass graduate exami- nations? an empirical study. InInternational Conference on Conceptual Modeling, pages 198–208. Springer, 2024

    2024

  38. [47]

    Modeler in a box: how can large language models aid in the simulation modeling process?Simulation, 100(7):727–749, 2024

    Erika Frydenlund, Joseph Mart ´ınez, Jose J Padilla, Katherine Palacio, and David Shuttleworth. Modeler in a box: how can large language models aid in the simulation modeling process?Simulation, 100(7):727–749, 2024

    2024

  39. [48]

    A visual analytics environment for navigating large conceptual models by leveraging generative artificial intelligence.Mathematics, 12(13):1946, 2024

    Tyler J Gandee, Sean C Glaze, and Philippe J Giabbanelli. A visual analytics environment for navigating large conceptual models by leveraging generative artificial intelligence.Mathematics, 12(13):1946, 2024

    1946

  40. [49]

    Transformers for modeling physical systems.Neural Networks, 146:272–289, 2022

    Nicholas Geneva and Nicholas Zabaras. Transformers for modeling physical systems.Neural Networks, 146:272–289, 2022

    2022

  41. [50]

    Generative agent-based modeling: an introduction and tutorial

    Navid Ghaffarzadegan, Aritra Majumdar, Ross Williams, and Niyousha Hos- seinichimeh. Generative agent-based modeling: an introduction and tutorial. System Dynamics Review, 40(1):e1761, 2024

    2024

  42. [51]

    Giabbanelli

    Philippe J. Giabbanelli. Impact of complex network properties on routing in backbone networks. In2010 IEEE Globecom workshops, pages 389–393. IEEE, 2010

    2010

  43. [52]

    Gpt-based models meet simulation: How to efficiently use large-scale pre-trained language models across simulation tasks

    Philippe J Giabbanelli. Gpt-based models meet simulation: How to efficiently use large-scale pre-trained language models across simulation tasks. In2023 Winter simulation conference (WSC), pages 2920–2931. IEEE, 2023

    2023

  44. [53]

    Teaching computational modeling in the data science era.Procedia Computer Science, 80:1968–1977, 2016

    Philippe J Giabbanelli and Vijay K Mago. Teaching computational modeling in the data science era.Procedia Computer Science, 80:1968–1977, 2016

    1968

  45. [54]

    Broadening access to simulations for end-users via large language models: Challenges and opportunities

    Philippe J Giabbanelli, Jose J Padilla, and Ameeta Agrawal. Broadening access to simulations for end-users via large language models: Challenges and opportunities. In2024 winter simulation conference (wsc), pages 2535–

  46. [55]

    Emerging uses of ai-generated images for equitable and transparent simulations

    Philippe J Giabbanelli, Kourosh Shoele, and Megan A Witherow. Emerging uses of ai-generated images for equitable and transparent simulations. In Proceedings of the AAAI Symposium Series, volume 7, pages 20–25, 2025

    2025

  47. [56]

    right to explanation

    Bryce Goodman and Seth Flaxman. European union regulations on algorith- mic decision-making and a “right to explanation”.AI magazine, 38(3):50–57, 2017

    2017

  48. [57]

    H. He, X. Liu, and X. Deng. Model validation and llm-based model enhance- ment for analyzing networked anagram experiments. InProceedings of the 2025 Winter Simulation Conference, pages 2003–2014, Seattle, WA, USA, December 2025

    2025

  49. [58]

    Safe reinforcement learning on autonomous vehicles

    David Isele, Alireza Nakhaei, and Kikuo Fujimura. Safe reinforcement learning on autonomous vehicles. In2018 IEEE/RSJ International Con- ference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), pages 1–6, 2018. doi: 10.1109/IROS.2018.8593420

    2018

  50. [59]

    From natural language to simulations: applying ai to automate simulation modelling of logistics systems.International Journal of Production Research, 62(4):1434–1457, 2024

    Ilya Jackson, Maria Jesus Saenz, and Dmitry Ivanov. From natural language to simulations: applying ai to automate simulation modelling of logistics systems.International Journal of Production Research, 62(4):1434–1457, 2024. AI and M&S: An Overview 29

    2024

  51. [60]

    Leveraging large language models for data analysis automation.PloS one, 20 (2):e0317084, 2025

    Jacqueline A Jansen, Art¨ ur Manukyan, Nour Al Khoury, and Altuna Akalin. Leveraging large language models for data analysis automation.PloS one, 20 (2):e0317084, 2025

    2025

  52. [61]

    Machine learning powered inverse design for strain fields of hierarchical architectures

    Liuchao Jin, Shouyi Yu, Jianxiang Cheng, Zhigang Liu, Kang Zhang, Sicong Zhou, Xiangnan He, Guoquan Xie, Mahdi Bodaghi, Qi Ge, et al. Machine learning powered inverse design for strain fields of hierarchical architectures. Composites Part B: Engineering, 299:112372, 2025

    2025

  53. [62]

    Scenario development using web mining for outlining technology futures.Technological forecasting and social change, 156:120086, 2020

    Victoria Kayser and Erduana Shala. Scenario development using web mining for outlining technology futures.Technological forecasting and social change, 156:120086, 2020

    2020

  54. [63]

    Futuristic data- driven scenario building: Incorporating text mining and fuzzy association rule mining into fuzzy cognitive map.Expert Systems with Applications, 57: 311–323, 2016

    Jieun Kim, Mintak Han, Youngjo Lee, and Yongtae Park. Futuristic data- driven scenario building: Incorporating text mining and fuzzy association rule mining into fuzzy cognitive map.Expert Systems with Applications, 57: 311–323, 2016

    2016

  55. [64]

    Scenario- based foresight in the age of digital technologies and ai

    Patrick K ¨odding, Christian Koldewey, and Roman Dumitrescu. Scenario- based foresight in the age of digital technologies and ai. InNew digital work: Digital sovereignty at the workplace, pages 51–67. Springer, 2023

    2023

  56. [65]

    Digital twin in manufacturing: A categorical literature review and classification.IFAC-PapersOnLine, 51(11):1016–1022, 2018

    Werner Kritzinger, Matthias Karner, Georg Traar, Jan Henjes, and Wilfried Sihn. Digital twin in manufacturing: A categorical literature review and classification.IFAC-PapersOnLine, 51(11):1016–1022, 2018

    2018

  57. [66]

    PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2025

    Reem Kseibati.Cooling Innovation and Circularity: Addressing Water Stress in the Age of AI-Driven Data Centers. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2025

    2025

  58. [67]

    A deep learning architecture for predictive control.IFAC- PapersOnLine, 51(18):512–517, 2018

    Steven Spielberg Pon Kumar, Aditya Tulsyan, Bhushan Gopaluni, and Philip Loewen. A deep learning architecture for predictive control.IFAC- PapersOnLine, 51(18):512–517, 2018

    2018

  59. [68]

    Generative ai for automatic simulation model generation in factory planning: A framework and prototype.Procedia Computer Science, 274:1024–1033, 2025

    Sanket Kute, Da Ma, Richard Reider, Marcel M¨ uller, and Sebastian Lang. Generative ai for automatic simulation model generation in factory planning: A framework and prototype.Procedia Computer Science, 274:1024–1033, 2025

    2025

  60. [69]

    Applying lsa text mining technique in envisioning social impacts of emerging technologies: The case of drone technology.Technovation, 60:15–28, 2017

    Heeyeul Kwon, Jieun Kim, and Yongtae Park. Applying lsa text mining technique in envisioning social impacts of emerging technologies: The case of drone technology.Technovation, 60:15–28, 2017

    2017

  61. [70]

    Lstm and gru type recurrent neural networks in model predictive control: A review.Neurocomputing, page 129712, 2025

    Maciej Lawry ´nczuk and Krzysztof Zarzycki. Lstm and gru type recurrent neural networks in model predictive control: A review.Neurocomputing, page 129712, 2025

    2025

  62. [71]

    Enhanced input modeling for construction sim- ulation using bayesian deep neural networks

    Yitong Li and Wenying Ji. Enhanced input modeling for construction sim- ulation using bayesian deep neural networks. In2019 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC), pages 2978–2985. IEEE, 2019

    2019

  63. [72]

    Bpmn assis- tant: An llm-based approach to business process modeling.arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.24592, 2025

    Josip Tomo Licardo, Nikola Tankovic, and Darko Etinger. Bpmn assis- tant: An llm-based approach to business process modeling.arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.24592, 2025

    2025

  64. [73]

    Are LLMs capable of data-based statistical and causal reasoning? benchmark- ing advanced quantitative reasoning with data

    Xiao Liu, Zirui Wu, Xueqing Wu, Pan Lu, Kai-Wei Chang, and Yansong Feng. Are LLMs capable of data-based statistical and causal reasoning? benchmark- ing advanced quantitative reasoning with data. In Lun-Wei Ku, Andre Martins, 30 Niclas Feldkamp, Philippe J. Giabbanelli, Istvan...

    2024 doi

  65. [74]

    AI simulation by digital twins: Systematic survey, reference framework, and mapping to a standardized architecture

    Xiaoran Liu and Istvan David. AI simulation by digital twins: Systematic survey, reference framework, and mapping to a standardized architecture. Softw Syst Model, 2025. doi: 10.1007/s10270-025-01306-0

    2025 doi

  66. [75]

    Introduction to digital twins for the smart grid,

    Xiaoran Liu and Istvan David. Introduction to digital twins for the smart grid,

  67. [76]

    Enhancing input parameter estimation by machine learning for the simulation of large-scale logistics networks

    Yang Liu, Liang Yan, Sheng Liu, Ting Jiang, Feng Zhang, Yu Wang, and Shengnan Wu. Enhancing input parameter estimation by machine learning for the simulation of large-scale logistics networks. In2020 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC), pages 608–619. IEEE, 2020

    2020

  68. [77]

    When do we need massive computations to perform detailed covid-19 simulations?Advanced Theory and Simulations, 5(2):2100343, 2022

    Christopher B Lutz and Philippe J Giabbanelli. When do we need massive computations to perform detailed covid-19 simulations?Advanced Theory and Simulations, 5(2):2100343, 2022

    2022

  69. [78]

    Admpmodeler: Modeling administrative processes using large language models

    Mattia Macr `ı, Francesca De Luzi, and Massimo Mecella. Admpmodeler: Modeling administrative processes using large language models. a case study. InInternational Conference on Electronic Government, pages 303–

  70. [79]

    Digital Twin Evolution for Sustainable Smart Ecosystems

    Judith Michael, Istvan David, and Dominik Bork. Digital Twin Evolution for Sustainable Smart Ecosystems. InACM/IEEE International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems Companion, MODELS-C, page 1061–1065. ACM, 2024. doi: 10.1145/3652620.3688343

    2024

  71. [80]

    Nerf: Representing scenes as neural radiance fields for view synthesis.Communications of the ACM, 65(1):99–106, 2021

    Ben Mildenhall, Pratul P Srinivasan, Matthew Tancik, Jonathan T Barron, Ravi Ramamoorthi, and Ren Ng. Nerf: Representing scenes as neural radiance fields for view synthesis.Communications of the ACM, 65(1):99–106, 2021

    2021

  72. [81]

    Towards an ontological framework for validity frames

    Rakshit Mittal, Raheleh Eslampanah, Lucas Lima, Hans Vangheluwe, and Dominique Blouin. Towards an ontological framework for validity frames. In2023 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems Companion (MODELS-C), pages 801–805, 2023. do...

    2023

  73. [82]

    Unlocking the potential of past research: using generative ai to reconstruct healthcare simulation models

    Thomas Monks, Alison Harper, and Amy Heather. Unlocking the potential of past research: using generative ai to reconstruct healthcare simulation models. Journal of the Operational Research Society, pages 1–24, 2025

    2025

  74. [83]

    Input data modeling: an approach using generative adversarial networks

    Jos ´e Arnaldo Barra Montevechi, Afonso Teberga Campos, Gustavo Teodoro Gabriel, and Carlos Henrique dos Santos. Input data modeling: an approach using generative adversarial networks. In2021 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC), pages 1–12. IEEE, 2021

    2021

  75. [84]

    Comparison of five estimation methods for the parameters of the johnson unbounded distribution using simulated and real-data samples

    David F Mu ˜noz. Comparison of five estimation methods for the parameters of the johnson unbounded distribution using simulated and real-data samples. Computational Statistics, pages 1–32, 2025

    2025

  76. [85]

    Ai for system dy- namics: Mapping progress across six modelling stages

    Aisyah Muthiah, Hasan Turan, and Sondoss Elsawah. Ai for system dy- namics: Mapping progress across six modelling stages. InProceedings of the International System Dynamics Conference, Boston, MA, USA, August 2025. AI and M&S: An Overview 31

    2025

  77. [86]

    Ashkan Negahban and Philippe J Giabbanelli. Hybrid agent-based simulation of adoption behavior and social interactions: Alternatives, opportunities, and pitfalls.IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems, 9(3):770–780, 2021

    2021

  78. [87]

    Reversed model verification by inferring conceptual models from simulation code

    Rumyana Neykova and Derek Groen. Reversed model verification by inferring conceptual models from simulation code. InInternational Conference on Computational Science, pages 361–368. Springer, 2025

    2025

  79. [88]

    On discriminative vs

    Andrew Ng and Michael Jordan. On discriminative vs. generative classifiers: A comparison of logistic regression and naive bayes.Advances in neural information processing systems, 14, 2001

    2001

  80. [89]

    Automated generation of bpmn processes from textual requirements

    Quentin Nivon and Gwen Sala¨ un. Automated generation of bpmn processes from textual requirements. InInternational Conference on Service-Oriented Computing, pages 185–201. Springer, 2024

    2024

  81. [90]

    Mapping the mul- tidimensional trend of generative ai: A bibliometric analysis and qualitative thematic review.Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 17:100576, 2025

    Dragos, M Obreja, R ˘azvan Rughinis, , and Daniel Rosner. Mapping the mul- tidimensional trend of generative ai: A bibliometric analysis and qualitative thematic review.Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 17:100576, 2025

    2025

  82. [91]

    Ai- empowered data-driven agent-based modeling and simulation: Challenges, methodologies, and future perspectives

    Bhakti Stephan Onggo, Zhe He, Pengfei Lu, Qiang Bai, and Yilin Hu. Ai- empowered data-driven agent-based modeling and simulation: Challenges, methodologies, and future perspectives. InProceedings of the 2025 Winter Simulation Conference, pages 13–27, Seattle, WA, USA, December 2025

    2025

  83. [92]

    Generative agents: Interactive simu- lacra of human behavior

    Joon Sung Park, Joseph O’Brien, Carrie Jun Cai, Meredith Ringel Morris, Percy Liang, and Michael S Bernstein. Generative agents: Interactive simu- lacra of human behavior. InProceedings of the 36th annual acm symposium on user interface software and technology, pages 1–22, 2023

    2023

  84. [93]

    Future disaster scenario using big data: a case study of extreme cold wave.International Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics, 11(3):362–369, 2016

    SJ Park, DW Kim, JH Kim, JH Chung, and JS Lee. Future disaster scenario using big data: a case study of extreme cold wave.International Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics, 11(3):362–369, 2016

    2016

  85. [94]

    Marcelo Pasetti, James William Santos, Nicholas Kluge Corr ˆea, Nythamar de Oliveira, and Camila Palhares Barbosa. Technical, legal, and ethical chal- lenges of generative artificial intelligence: an analysis of the governance of training data and copyrights.Discover Artificia...

    2025

  86. [95]

    Agent-based models assisted by supervised learning: A proposal for model specification.Electronics, 12(3): 495, 2023

    Alejandro Platas-Lopez, Alejandro Guerra-Hernandez, Marcela Quiroz- Castellanos, and Nicandro Cruz-Ramirez. Agent-based models assisted by supervised learning: A proposal for model specification.Electronics, 12(3): 495, 2023

    2023

  87. [96]

    A chaotic view of behavior change: a quantum leap for health promotion.International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 3(1):25, 2006

    Ken Resnicow and Roger Vaughan. A chaotic view of behavior change: a quantum leap for health promotion.International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 3(1):25, 2006

    2006

  88. [97]

    Conceptual modeling for simulation

    Stewart Robinson. Conceptual modeling for simulation. In2013 Winter Simulations Conference (WSC), pages 377–388. IEEE, 2013

    2013

  89. [98]

    Palgrave Macmillan, 2014

    Stewart Robinson.Simulation: the practice of model development and use (2nd ed.). Palgrave Macmillan, 2014

    2014

  90. [99]

    Using genera- tive adversarial networks (gan) to simulate central-place foraging trajectories

    Am ´ed´ee Roy, Ronan Fablet, and Sophie Lanco Bertrand. Using genera- tive adversarial networks (gan) to simulate central-place foraging trajectories. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 13(6):1275–1287, 2022. 32 Niclas Feldkamp, Philippe J. Giabbanelli, Istvan David

    2022

  91. [100]

    Generative ai in simulation-based test environments for large-scale cyber-physical systems: An industrial study

    Masoud Sadrnezhaad, Jos ´e Antonio Hern´andez L´opez, Torvald M˚artensson, and D ´aniel Varr´o. Generative ai in simulation-based test environments for large-scale cyber-physical systems: An industrial study. InInternational Con- ference on Product-Focused Software Process Imp...

    2025

  92. [101]

    Data farming: Methods for the present, opportunities for the future.ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation (TOMACS), 30(4):1–30, 2020

    Susan M Sanchez. Data farming: Methods for the present, opportunities for the future.ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation (TOMACS), 30(4):1–30, 2020

    2020

  93. [102]

    Verification and validation of simulation models.Journal of Simulation, 7(1):12–24, 2013

    R G Sargent. Verification and validation of simulation models.Journal of Simulation, 7(1):12–24, 2013. doi: 10.1057/jos.2012.20

    2013 doi

  94. [103]

    Building and learning with models using ai.Available at SSRN 5341966, 2025

    William Schoenberg. Building and learning with models using ai.Available at SSRN 5341966, 2025

    2025

  95. [104]

    How well can ai build sd models?arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.15580, 2025

    William Schoenberg, Davidson Girard, Saras Chung, Ellen O’Neill, Janet Velasquez, and Sara Metcalf. How well can ai build sd models?arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.15580, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  96. [105]

    Guiding evolutionary algo- rithms with large language models to learn fuzzy cognitive maps.Neural Computing and Applications, 37(18):11891–11908, 2025

    Ryan Schuerkamp and Philippe J Giabbanelli. Guiding evolutionary algo- rithms with large language models to learn fuzzy cognitive maps.Neural Computing and Applications, 37(18):11891–11908, 2025

    2025

  97. [106]

    Use of shap- ley additive explanations in interpreting agent-based simulations of military operational scenarios

    Lynne Serre, Maude Amyot-Bourgeois, and Brittany Astles. Use of shap- ley additive explanations in interpreting agent-based simulations of military operational scenarios. In2021 annual modeling and simulation conference (ANNSIM), pages 1–12. IEEE, 2021

    2021

  98. [107]

    Sustainable ai: An environmental sustainability perspec- tive

    Julie Sinistore, Joshua Skov, Derek Fehrer, Jonathan Balsvik, Jon Dickinson, and Richard Reitz. Sustainable ai: An environmental sustainability perspec- tive. InHandbook of Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence, pages 1–38. Springer, 2025

    2025

  99. [108]

    Kingma, Abhishek Kumar, Stefano Ermon, and Ben Poole

    Yang Song, Jascha Sohl-Dickstein, Diederik P. Kingma, Abhishek Kumar, Stefano Ermon, and Ben Poole. Score-based generative modeling through stochastic differential equations. InProceedings of the International Confer- ence on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2021

    2021

  100. [109]

    The future of artificial intelligence in ecosystem modeling

    Scott Spillias, Rowan Trebilco, Matthew P Adams, Fabio Boschetti, Andrew Constable, Piers Dunstan, Simon Ferrier, Javier Porobic, Einat Grimberg, Nicola Grigg, et al. The future of artificial intelligence in ecosystem modeling. BioScience, page biaf169, 2025

    2025

  101. [110]

    Lost in the pipeline: How well do large language models handle data prepa- ration?arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.21708, 2025

    Matteo Spreafico, Ludovica Tassini, Camilla Sancricca, and Cinzia Cappiello. Lost in the pipeline: How well do large language models handle data prepa- ration?arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.21708, 2025

    2025

  102. [111]

    Sutton and Andrew G

    Richard S. Sutton and Andrew G. Barto.Reinforcement Learning: An Intro- duction. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2 edition, 2018. ISBN 978-0-262- 03924-6

    2018

  103. [112]

    Hybrid modeling integrating artificial intelligence and mod- eling & simulation paradigms

    Andreas Tolk. Hybrid modeling integrating artificial intelligence and mod- eling & simulation paradigms. In2024 winter simulation conference (wsc), pages 1271–1280. IEEE, 2024. AI and M&S: An Overview 33

    2024

  104. [113]

    Attention is all you need.Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, 2017

    Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Lukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. Attention is all you need.Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, 2017

    2017

  105. [114]

    Generative agent-based modeling with actions grounded in physical, social, or digital space using concordia.arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.03664, 2023

    Alexander Sasha Vezhnevets, John P Agapiou, Avia Aharon, Ron Ziv, Jayd Matyas, Edgar A Du´e˜nez-Guzm´an, William A Cunningham, Simon Osindero, Danny Karmon, and Joel Z Leibo. Generative agent-based modeling with actions grounded in physical, social, or digital space using conc...

    2023 arXiv

  106. [115]

    Metadata practices for simulation workflows.Scientific Data, 12(1):942, 2025

    Jos ´e Villamar, Matthias Kelbling, Heather L More, Michael Denker, Tom Tetzlaff, Johanna Senk, and Stephan Thober. Metadata practices for simulation workflows.Scientific Data, 12(1):942, 2025

    2025

  107. [116]

    Automatic reuse, adaption, and execution of simulation experiments via provenance patterns.ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simula- tion, 33(1-2):1–27, 2023

    Pia Wilsdorf, Anja Wolpers, Jason Hilton, Fiete Haack, and Adelinde Uhrma- cher. Automatic reuse, adaption, and execution of simulation experiments via provenance patterns.ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simula- tion, 33(1-2):1–27, 2023

    2023

  108. [117]

    Prescriptive analytics systems revised: a systematic literature review from an information systems perspec- tive.Information systems and e-business management, 23(2):279–353, 2025

    Christopher Wissuchek and Patrick Zschech. Prescriptive analytics systems revised: a systematic literature review from an information systems perspec- tive.Information systems and e-business management, 23(2):279–353, 2025

    2025

  109. [118]

    A method for predicting high- resolution time series using sequence-to-sequence models

    Benjamin Woerrlein and Steffen Strassburger. A method for predicting high- resolution time series using sequence-to-sequence models. In2020 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC), pages 1075–1086. IEEE, 2020

    2020

  110. [119]

    Comparing implementations of cellular automata as images: A novel approach to verification by combining image processing and machine learning

    Maciej K Wozniak and Philippe J Giabbanelli. Comparing implementations of cellular automata as images: A novel approach to verification by combining image processing and machine learning. InProceedings of the 2021 ACM SIGSIM conference on principles of advanced discrete simula...

    2021

  111. [120]

    A new application of machine learning: detecting errors in network simulations

    Maciej K Wozniak, Luke Liang, Hieu Phan, and Philippe J Giabbanelli. A new application of machine learning: detecting errors in network simulations. In2022 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC), pages 653–664. IEEE, 2022

    2022

  112. [121]

    A tutorial review of machine learning- based model predictive control methods.Reviews in Chemical Engineering, 41(4):359–400, 2025

    Zhe Wu, Panagiotis D Christofides, Wanlu Wu, Yujia Wang, Fahim Abdullah, Aisha Alnajdi, and Yash Kadakia. A tutorial review of machine learning- based model predictive control methods.Reviews in Chemical Engineering, 41(4):359–400, 2025

    2025

  113. [122]

    Robustness and generalization.Machine learning, 86(3):391–423, 2012

    Huan Xu and Shie Mannor. Robustness and generalization.Machine learning, 86(3):391–423, 2012

    2012

  114. [123]

    Automl based workflow for design of experiments (doe) selection and benchmarking data acquisition strategies with simulation models.Scientific Reports, 14(1):32170, 2024

    Xukuan Xu, Donghui Li, Jinghou Bi, and Michael Moeckel. Automl based workflow for design of experiments (doe) selection and benchmarking data acquisition strategies with simulation models.Scientific Reports, 14(1):32170, 2024

    2024

  115. [124]

    Academic press, 2000

    Bernard P Zeigler, Herbert Praehofer, and Tag Gon Kim.Theory of modeling and simulation. Academic press, 2000

    2000

  116. [125]

    Data cleaning using large language models

    Shuo Zhang, Zezhou Huang, and Eugene Wu. Data cleaning using large language models. In2025 IEEE 41st International Conference on Data Engineering Workshops (ICDEW), pages 28–32. IEEE, 2025. 34 Niclas Feldkamp, Philippe J. Giabbanelli, Istvan David

    2025

  117. [126]

    Breaking barriers or build- ing dependency? exploring team-llm collaboration in ai-infused classroom debate

    Zihan Zhang, Black Sun, and Pengcheng An. Breaking barriers or build- ing dependency? exploring team-llm collaboration in ai-infused classroom debate. InProceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 1–19, 2025

    2025

  118. [127]

    Do we Still Need People? Comparing Human and LLM Personas in Political Modeling and Simulation

    Stephen Zhong, Nathalie Japkowicz, and Philippe Giabbanelli. Do we Still Need People? Comparing Human and LLM Personas in Political Modeling and Simulation . In2025 ACM/IEEE 28th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems Companion (MODELS-C), p...

    2025

  119. [128]

    Scenario generator design method for service ecosystem governance driven by llm-empowered agents simulation

    Deyu Zhou, Yugi Hou, Xiao Xue, Xudong Lu, Qingzhong Li, and Lizhen Cui. Scenario generator design method for service ecosystem governance driven by llm-empowered agents simulation. In2025 IEEE International Conference on Web Services (ICWS), pages 552–562, 2025

    2025

  120. [2026]

    URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.14256

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.