Talk:Agent-based model

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Computer science (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Computer science related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Systems (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is within the field of Scientific modeling.

Traffic management[edit]

I wanted to disambiguate the link to Traffic management, but I didn't know which type of traffic management was intended here. --RichardVeryard 14:34, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Game Theory[edit]

It's really annoying to link to a topic in another article that does not exist. Edit the main article to link to something actually on cognitive closure or don't link at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:14, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Merge or differentiate?[edit]

It's still not clear to me (several years later) whether an Agent based model is or is not the same thing as a Multi-agent system. Either the pages should be merged, or it should be made clear how one concept differs from the other. Rinconsoleao (talk) 10:11, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

In short:
ABM - Used to evaluate emergent properties of a system from microscale or 'lower-level' entities.
MAS - Used in engineering to design complex systems with emergent properties arising from 'lower-level entities.
The former is useful for understanding existing complex systems, particularly naturally arising systems, while the latter is used as an engineering approach for designing systems with useful properties such as robustness and decentralisation. I think this is fairly clear in the article introduction - although perhaps not to non-experts? Hope that helps. (talk) 06:36, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

individual-based models?[edit]

Need of reference proving that Agent-Based Model and "individual-based models" are the same thing. Never heard of indiv-based mod. neither in sociology nor computer science, but maybe in ecology it is used. In that case, we should specify the field where they are named as such. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samer.hc (talkcontribs) 14:02, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Agree with the first point here, I generally hear (and use) ABM to refer to models without a lattice and i-o to refer to those with a lattice (i.e. when agents have physical position). (talk) 00:26, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

I can confirm that IBM and ABM essentially refer to the same concept, in ecology the term IBM is used to stress that individuals (as opposed to populations) are modeled. FlorianHartig (talk) 17:43, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Added appropriate references that ABM is IBM in the context of ecology in the lead section (notably Grimm & Railsback 2005 is the definitive reference here). --Lexor|Talk 04:29, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Again distinctions ABM / IBM / MAS[edit]

There is still a lot of confusion in the article regarding the distinction between ABM / IBM / MAS. From the first paragraph

Particularly within ecology, ABMs are also called individual-based models (IBMs),[1]

>> correct

and individuals within IBMs may be simpler than than fully autonomous agents within ABMs.

>> This is a tautological statement. Of course they MAY be simpler, but so MAY agents in ABMs. If the intended meaning is that IBMs are TYPICALLY simpler than ABMs, I would disagree and call for a reference.

A review of recent literature on individual-based models, agent-based models, and multiagent systems shows that ABMs are used on non-computing related scientific domains including biology, ecology and social science.[2]

>> I am not quite sure what this sentence is supposed to mean. What are non-computing related fields? Is computational biology / ecology a non-computational related field? And are do you mean they are ONLY used in these fields, or ALSO used in these fields

Agent-based modeling is related to, but distinct from, the concept of multi-agent systems or multi-agent simulation in that the goal of ABM is to search for explanatory insight into the collective behavior of agents obeying simple rules, typically in natural systems, rather than in designing agents or solving specific practical or engineering problems.[2]

>> ABMs are always used to understand a certain phenomenon, and MAS are always used to solve practical engineering problems? I had a look at the reference, I see nothing to support the statement in reference [2]. Btw. the same claim about fundamental differences is made in

In general, I wonder why everyone is so keen on finding a distinction between ABM, IBM and MAS. From the implementation perspective, those are the same. In ecological fields, people say IBM, in social science ABM, and in computational / engineering fields MAS. As different fields have different research interests, it may appear that MAS are used more for practical problems, and IBMs more for understanding, but that seems to be a reflection of the field rather than of a recognized property of a MAS. --FlorianHartig (talk) 11:40, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

That is exactly as I see it. There is no formal difference, it is effectively a distinction based on tradition within fields. Please do make the changes reflecting the lack of formal distinction, I completely support you in this regard. I am One of Many (talk) 15:34, 17 May 2014 (UTC)


I have been cleaning up the citations in this article as best I can. As the majority of citations were inline but a handful used harvard style, I have therefore used inline throughout (with one exception where the sfn template is used to differentiate between pages cited). Many were incomplete or intended to be read as part of the text like harvard, instead of as a footnote so, in some cases, I have edited the text accordingly, hopefully preserving the intended meaning in the process, and expanded the references where possible. I have removed inline URLs, converting them to cite web references, even the dead links. Wherever possible I have used cite doi, otherwise cite journal or cite book as appropriate. There are still some references in the "General references" section that should probably be inline and there are equally some inline ones that may also be relevant as truly general references. I have, admittedly, not sought consensus on this so my apologies if I've been too bold. -- KenBailey (talk) 07:53, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Agent-based model. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

YesY Archived sources have been checked to be working

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:29, 28 February 2016 (UTC)