Least Cost Path (LCP) analysis is a recurrent theme in spatial archaeology. Based on a cost of movement image, the user can interpret how difficult it is to travel around in a landscape. This kind of analysis frequently uses GIS tools to assess different landscapes. This model incorporates some aspects of the LCP analysis based on GIS with the capabilities of agent-based modeling, such as the possibility to simulate random behavior when moving. In this model the agent will travel around the coastal landscape of Southern Brazil, assessing its path based on the different cost of travel through the patches. The agents represent shellmound builders (sambaquieiros), who will travel mainly through the use of canoes around the lagoons.

How it works?
When the simulation starts the hiker agent moves around the world, a representation of the lagoon landscape of the Santa Catarina state in Southern Brazil. The agent movement is based on the travel cost of each patch. This travel cost is taken from a cost surface raster created in ArcMap to represent the different cost of movement around the landscape. Each tick the agent will have a chance to select the best possible patch to move in its Field of View (FOV) that will take it towards its target destination. If it doesn’t select the best possible patch, it will randomly choose one of the patches to move in its FOV. The simulation stops when the hiker agent reaches the target destination. The elevation raster file and the cost surface map are based on a 1 Arc-second (30m) resolution SRTM image, scaled down 5 times. Each patch represents a square of 150m, with an area of 0,0225km². The dataset uses a UTM Sirgas 2000 22S projection system. There are four different cost functions available to use. They change the cost surface used by the hikers to navigate around the world.

We used our model to test how different combinations of dominance interactions present in H. saltator could result in linear, despotic, or shared hierarchies.

The model is a stylized representation of a social-ecological system of agents moving and harvesting a renewable resource. The purpose is to analyze how mobility affects sustainability. Experiments changing agents’ mobility, landscape and information governments have can be run.

Industrial clustering patterns are the result of an entrepreneurial process where spinoffs inherit the ideas and attributes of their parent firms. This computational model maps these patterns using abstract methodologies.

EiLab - Model I - is a capital exchange model. That is a type of economic model used to study the dynamics of modern money which, strangely, is very similar to the dynamics of energetic systems. It is a variation on the BDY models first described in the paper by Dragulescu and Yakovenko, published in 2000, entitled “Statistical Mechanics of Money”. This model demonstrates the ability of capital exchange models to produce a distribution of wealth that does not have a preponderance of poor agents and a small number of exceedingly wealthy agents.

This is a re-implementation of a model first built in the C++ application called Entropic Index Laboratory, or EiLab. The first eight models in that application were labeled A through H, and are the BDY models. The BDY models all have a single constraint - a limit on how poor agents can be. That is to say that the wealth distribution is bounded on the left. This ninth model is a variation on the BDY models that has an added constraint that limits how wealthy an agent can be? It is bounded on both the left and right.

EiLab demonstrates the inevitable role of entropy in such capital exchange models, and can be used to examine the connections between changing entropy and changes in wealth distributions at a very minute level.

…

The model explores the impact of public disclosure on tax compliance among diverse agents, including individual taxpayers and a tax authority. It incorporates heterogeneous preferences and income endowments among taxpayers, captured through a utility function that considers psychic costs subtracted from expected pecuniary utility. These costs include moral, reciprocity, and stigma costs associated with norm violations, leading to variations in taxpayers’ risk attitudes and related parameters. The tax authority’s attributes, such as the frequency of random audits, penalty rate, and the choice between partial or full disclosure, remain fixed throughout the simulation. Income endowments and preference parameters are randomly assigned to taxpayers at the outset.

Taxpayers maximize their expected utility by reporting income, taking into account tax, penalty, and audit rates. They make annual decisions based on their own and their peers’ behaviors from the previous year. Taxpayers indirectly interact at the societal level through public disclosure conducted by the tax authority, exchanging tax information among peers. Each period in the simulation collects data on total reported income, average compliance rates per income group, distribution of compliance rates, counts of compliers, full evaders, partial evaders, and the numbers of taxpayers experiencing guilt and anger. The model evaluates whether public disclosure positively or negatively impacts compliance rates and quantifies this impact based on aggregated individual reporting behaviors.

Innovation a byproduct of the intellectual capital, requires a new paradigm for the production constituents. Human Capital HC,Structural capital SC and relational capital RC become key for intellectual capital and consequently for innovation.

The model simulates tail biting behaviour in pigs and how they can turn into a biter and/or victim. The effect of a redirected motivation, behavioural changes in victims and preference to bite a lying pig on tail biting can be tested in the model

This is a simulation model of an intelligent agent that has the objective to learn sustainable management of a renewable resource, such as a fish stock.

BarterNet is a platform for modeling early barter networks with the aim of learning how supply and demand for a good determine if traders will learn to use that good as a form of money. Traders use a good as money when they offer to trade for it even if they can’t consume it, but believe that they can subsequently trade it for a good they can consume in the near future.