David Mertz, Ph.D.
Simulacrum, Gnosis Software, Inc.
The stochastic behavior of real-world systems is often difficult to understand or predict. Sometimes it is possible rigorously to demonstrate statistical properties of systems--e.g. average, worst-case, and best-case performance features. But at other times situations like resource contentions, deadlocks, race conditions, and other pitfalls of concrete designs only become evident when you actually run (or simulate) a system.
SimPyis a Python package that allows you very easily to create models of discrete event systems.
I learned of the
SimPy package when I was contacted by one of
its creators, Klaus Mueller. Dr. Mueller had read the
Charming Python installments that presented techniques for
using Python 2.2+ generators to implement semi-coroutines and
"weightless" threads. In particular--and much to my
gratification--he found that these techniques were useful for
implementing Simula-67 style simulations in Python.
It turned out that Tony Vignaux and Chang Chui had previously
created another Python library that was conceptually closer to
Simscript, and that used standard threading rather than my
semi-coroutine technique. Working together, the group
determined that the generator-based style was much more
efficient, and recently launched a GPL'd project on
SimPy, currently at beta status.
Professor Vignaux hopes to use the unified
SimPy package in
his future university teaching; I believe the library is also
quite applicable to a variety of applied problems.
Prior to my recent correspondence and investigation, I
confessedly had no background in simulation as a programming
field. I suspect most readers of this installment share my
limitation. Although there is some novelty involved in the way
one thinks about this style of programming, simulations are
useful for understanding the behavior of resource limited
real-life systems. Whether you are interested in limited
bandwidth networks, automobile traffic behavior, market and
commercial optimization, biological/evolutionary interactions,
or other "stochastic" systems,
SimPy provides a simple Python
tool for such modelling.
This column installment uses a fairly simple example of a grocery store checkout area with multiple aisles. Using the presented simulation, we can ask questions about the economic and wait-time implications of various modifications to scanner technologies, shopper habits, staffing needs, and so on. The nice thing about this modelling is that it lets you make policy decisions in advance while having a clear idea of the implications of changes made. Obviously, most readers will not run a grocery store specifically, but the techniques are general for a large variety of systems.
There are just three abstract/parent classes provided
SimPy library, and these correspond to the three basic
concepts of a simulation. A number of other general functions
and constants are used to control the run of a simulation, but
the important concepts are tied with the classes.
The central concept in a simulation is a process. A process
is simply an object that does something, then sometimes waits
for a while before it is ready to do a next thing. In
you can also "passivate" a process, which means that it will
not do anything further unless called upon to do so by another
process. It is often useful to think of a process as trying to
complete a goal. Often a process is programmed as a loop in
which multiple actions are performed. Betweeen each action,
you insert a Python "yield" statement, which lets the
simulation scheduler carry out the actions of each waiting
process before returning control.
Many of the actions that processes perform depend on using
resources. A resource is simply anything that is limited in
availability. In a biological model, a resource might be a
food supply; in a network model, a resource could be a router
or a finite-bandwidth channel; in our market simulation, a
resource is a checkout aisle. The only thing a resource does
is restrict its usage to one particular process at any given
time. Under the
SimPy programming model, a process alone
determines how long it wants to retain a resource, the resource
itself is just passive. In a real-life system, the
model may or may not fit the conceptual scheme--it is easy to
think of resources that inherently limit their utilization
(e.g. a server computer that severs a connection if it does not
get a satisfactory response in a required timeframe). But as a
programming matter, it does not matter greatly whether a
process or a resource is the "active" party (just make sure you
understand your intention).
SimPy class is a monitor. A monitor is not
really essential, but merely a convenience. All a monitor does
is record events reported to it, and save statistics about
those events (averages, counts, variances, etc). The provided
Monitor class is a useful tool for logging simulation
measures, but you could record events by any other technique
you wished also. In fact, my example subclasses
provide some (slight) enhanced capabilities.
Most of the time in my articles, I present sample applications
all at once, but in this case I think it is more useful to walk
the reader through each step of the grocery store application
instead. You can clip together each portion if you wish; the
SimPy authors will include my example in future releases.
The first step in a
SimPy simulation is a few general import
#!/usr/bin/env python from __future__ import generators from SimPy import Simulation from SimPy.Simulation import hold, request, release, now from SimPy.Monitor import Monitor import random from math import sqrt
Some of the examples accompanying
SimPy use an "import *"
style, but I prefer to be more explicit about the namespaces I
populate. For Python 2.2--which is the minimum version needed
SimPy--you will need to import the generators feature as
indicated. After Python 2.3, this will not be necessary.
For my application, I define a few runtime constants that describe the scenarios I am interested in during a particular simulation run. As I change the scenario, I must edit these constants within the main script. If this were a more fleshed-out application, I might configure these parameters with command-line options, environment variables, or a configuration file. But for now, this style is adequate:
AISLES = 5 # Number of open aisles ITEMTIME = 0.1 # Time to ring up one item AVGITEMS = 20 # Average number of items purchased CLOSING = 60*12 # Minutes from store open to store close AVGCUST = 1500 # Average number of daily customers RUNS = 10 # Number of times to run the simulation
The main thing our simulation needs to do is define one or more processes. For the grocery store simulation, the process we are interested in is a customer who checks out at an aisle.
class Customer(Simulation.Process): def __init__(self): Simulation.Process.__init__(self) # Randomly pick how many items this customer is buying self.items = 1 + int(random.expovariate(1.0/AVGITEMS)) def checkout(self): start = now() # Customer decides to check out yield request, self, checkout_aisle at_checkout = now() # Customer gets to front of line waittime.tally(at_checkout-start) yield hold, self, self.items*ITEMTIME leaving = now() # Customer completes purchase checkouttime.tally(leaving-at_checkout) yield release, self, checkout_aisle
Each customer has decided to purchase a certain number of items (our simulation does not cover the selection of items from the grocery aisles, a customer simply arrives at checkout with his cart). I am not confident that exponential-variate distribution is genuinely an accurate model here--at the low end it feels right, but I feel like there should be a fuzzy top limit on how many items a real-life shopper ever buys. In any case, you can see how easy it would be to adjust our simulation should better model information become available.
The actions a customer takes are the thing to focus on. The
"execution method" of a customer is
process method is often named
.execute(), but in
.checkout() seemed most descriptive. You can use
whatever name you wish. The only real actions taken by a
Customer object are checking the simulated time at a couple
points, and logging some durations to the
checkouttime monitors. But in between the actions, are the
yield statements. In the first case, the customer
requests a resource (a checkout aisle). The customer cannot do
anything else until she gets the needed resource. Once she gets
to the checkout aisle, the customer actually checks out--which
takes an amount of time proportionate to the number of items
she purchases. Finally, once she is through the checkout, the
customer releases the resource so that other customers can use
The above code defines what a customer Class does, but we need
to create some actual customer objects before we run a
simulation. We could generate a customer object for each
customer who will shop during the day, and assign each one an
appropriate checkout time. But a more parsimonious approach is
to let a factory object generate the needed customer objects
"as each customer enters the store." The simulation is not
really interested simultaneously in all the customers that will
shop during a day, but only in the ones who contend for
checkout aisles at the same time. Notice that the
Customer_Factory class is itself part of the simulation--it
is a process. Despite possible associations with manufactured
robot workers, a la Fritz Lang's Metropolis, you should just
think of the customer factory as a programming convenience; it
does not correspond directly to anything in the modelled
class Customer_Factory(Simulation.Process): def run(self): while 1: c = Customer() Simulation.activate(c, c.checkout()) arrival = random.expovariate(float(AVGCUST)/CLOSING) yield hold, self, arrival
As I mentioned earlier, I want to collect some statistics that
Monitor class does not address. Namely,
I am not just interested in the average checkout time, but also
the worst case in a given scenario. So I created an enhanced
monitor that collects minimum and maximum tallied values.
class Monitor2(Monitor): def __init__(self): Monitor.__init__(self) self.min, self.max = (int(2**31-1),0) def tally(self, x): Monitor.tally(self, x) self.min = min(self.min, x) self.max = max(self.max, x)
The final step in our simulation is to actually run it. In most of the standard examples, a simulation is run just once. But for my grocery store, I decided to loop through several simulations, each one corresponding to a day of business. This turns out to be a good idea, since some statistics differ fairly significantly from day to day (as different random values are used for customer arrivals and item counts).
for run in range(RUNS): waittime = Monitor2() checkouttime = Monitor2() checkout_aisle = Simulation.Resource(AISLES) Simulation.initialize() cf = Customer_Factory() Simulation.activate(cf, cf.run(), 0.0) Simulation.simulate(until=CLOSING) #print "Customers:", checkouttime.count() print "Waiting time average: %.1f" % waittime.mean(), \ "(std dev %.1f, maximum %.1f)" % (sqrt(waittime.var()),waittime.max) #print "Checkout time average: %1f" % checkouttime.mean(), \ # "(standard deviation %.1f)" % sqrt(checkouttime.var()) print 'AISLES:', AISLES, ' ITEM TIME:', ITEMTIME
When I first thought of my grocery store model, I thought a
simulation would answer a few direct questions. For example, I
imagined that an owner might have a choice between buying
improved scanners (reducing
ITEMTIME) or hiring more clerks
AISLES). I thought I would just run the
simulation under each scenario--assuming given labor and
technology costs--and determine which was cheaper.
Once I played with the simulation, I realized something that is probably more interesting than I had anticipated. Looking at all my collected data, I noticed that I did not know what it was I was trying to optimize. For example, is it more important to reduce average checkout time, or to reduce the worst case time? Which makes for better overall customer satisfaction? Moreover, how do I compare the time a customer spends waiting to arrive at a checkout aisle with the time spent ringing up the items? In my personal experience, I get impatient waiting in the line, but I feel less worried once my items are being rung up (even if it takes a while).
I do not know the answers to these types of considerations--I do not actually own or run a grocery store, I just invented the problem. But having a simulation would let me determine exactly what the tradeoffs were; and it is simple enough to tweak behaviors (including those not yet explicitly parameterized--e.g. do customers really arrive consistently throughout the day).
Let me show just one closing example that proves the value of the model. I wrote above that the behavior of complex systems is hard to conceptualize. Here is something I consider a proof of that fact. What do you think happens when available aisles are reduced from six to five (with other parameters constant). I would initially expect slightly worst checkout times. The reality is different:
% python Market.py Waiting time average: 0.5 (std dev 0.9, maximum 4.5) Waiting time average: 0.3 (std dev 0.6, maximum 3.7) Waiting time average: 0.4 (std dev 0.8, maximum 5.6) Waiting time average: 0.4 (std dev 0.8, maximum 5.2) Waiting time average: 0.4 (std dev 0.8, maximum 5.8) Waiting time average: 0.3 (std dev 0.6, maximum 5.2) Waiting time average: 0.5 (std dev 1.1, maximum 5.2) Waiting time average: 0.5 (std dev 1.0, maximum 5.4) AISLES: 6 ITEM TIME: 0.1 % python Market.py Waiting time average: 2.1 (std dev 2.3, maximum 9.5) Waiting time average: 1.8 (std dev 2.3, maximum 10.9) Waiting time average: 1.3 (std dev 1.7, maximum 7.3) Waiting time average: 1.7 (std dev 2.1, maximum 9.5) Waiting time average: 4.2 (std dev 5.6, maximum 21.3) Waiting time average: 1.6 (std dev 2.6, maximum 12.0) Waiting time average: 1.3 (std dev 1.6, maximum 7.5) Waiting time average: 1.5 (std dev 2.1, maximum 11.2) AISLES: 5 ITEM TIME: 0.1
Rather than being 1/5 worse or something like that, eliminating one checkout aisle causes average waiting time to increase by around 4 times. Moreover, the unluckiest customer (during these particular runs) goes from a 6 minute wait to a 21 minute wait. If I were the manager, I think knowing this threshhold condition would be extremely important to customer satisfaction. Who would have known?
The homepage for
SimPy has a number of useful documents that
detail both its API and give examples of working with
Given its beta status at the time of this writing, some
SimPy may still change over time:
Implementing "weightless threads" with Python generators
Generator-based state machines
Iterators and simple generators
David Mertz exists virtually. With a bit of disappointment he suspects that Neuromancer style direct interfaces between brain and net will not quite come around during his lifetime; but with a bit of dread, he imagines the civil liberties implications of what will happen in 50 years. David may be reached at [email protected]; his life pored over at http://gnosis.cx/publish/. Suggestions and recommendations on this, past, or future, columns are welcomed.