A case study demonstrating the utility of inter-program comparative testing for diagnosing errors in building simulation programs

The validation of a building simulation program or model is a daunting task, and one that should receive as much attention as algorithm and code development. Previous research in this field has led to a well-accepted approach composed of analytical verification, empirical validation, and inter-program comparative testing to diagnose model deficiencies, mathematical solution errors, and coding errors. Through a case study, this paper demonstrates the utility of inter-program comparative testing. It shows that by comparing program-to-program results, solution problems, coding errors, and deficiencies in mathematical model descriptions can be efficiently identified, diagnosed, and subsequently repaired.