Comparison-Evaluation of Java-Based Discrete-Time Simulation Tools University of West Bohemia Faculty of Applied Sciences Department of Computer Science and Engineering Plzeň, Czech Republic Jaroslav Kačer, Tomáš Koutný, David Codl

Common Principles ● Inspired by Simula ● 2 approaches to simulation execution Event interpretationPseudo-parallel processes ● Huge event handler ● Activities of process are not grouped together ● Java concurrency is not fully used ● Process described with class ● Life is compact piece of code ● Profit from all benefits of Java concurrency

J-Sim, Plzeň ● ZČU/FAV/KIV ● Version ● Source & byte code, reference guide ● Pseudo-parallel processes ● Life, hold, activate, passivate, cancel ● Visualization support, random numbers

JavaSim, Newcastle upon Tyne ● Newcastle upon Tyne ● Version 0.3 ● Manual, tool, examples, javadoc documentation ● Pseudo-parallel processes ● Hold, activate, passivate, cancel ● Random numbers, results statistics

JavaSim, Edinburgh ● Management School of Edinbugh University ● Version 1.0 ● Events different from Simula's concept ● Node is realized as event ● Visualization and debugging support ● No random numbers nor statistics

simjava, Edinburgh ● School of Informatics of University in Edinburgh ● Tested version 1.2, available version 2.0 ● Pseudo-parallel processes ● Set of active elements connected with requests via ports ● Need to override active element's body ● Visualization, writing results into a text file

Comparative Criteria ● Source code quality, 15% – Source code, comments, documentary & empty lines ● Documentation, 20% ● User friendliness, 25% – Visualization, good ref. guide, easy readable source ● Simulation results, 40% – Compared to theoretically computed values

Testing Application ● Application to choose, run and observe each tool ● Strictly followed documentation

Results