SERDUX-MARCIM simulates the propagation of a cyberattack over the computational network of an organization in the maritime sector, at the strategic level of decision-making. It is the instantiation of ABM-MARCIM, the agent-based model of the MARCIM framework for the modeling and simulation of maritime cyberdefense.

Every computational asset of the target organization – servers, endpoints, routers, gateways, vessel systems, radars – is an agent that occupies one of six states at each time step: Susceptible, Exposed, Resistant, Degraded, Unavailable or Destroyed, the initials of which give the model its name. The states Degraded, Unavailable and Destroyed are associated with the D5 cyberattack effects (disrupt, degrade, deny, destroy, deceive) as a function of the degree and the duration of the attack. Thirteen transitions between states are admissible.

Unlike a conventional agent-based model, the local update function is not an individual behavioral rule. It is a system of six ordinary differential equations with eight time-dependent transition rates – propagation, cyberattack (degraded), cyberattack (unavailable), cyberattack (destroyed), recovery, sanitation, loss of resistance, and unavailability by other causes. The values of those rates derive from the capabilities of the target organization, the capabilities of the attacker, and the degree and duration of the cyberattack, computed through a cyber risk approach aligned with the OWASP Risk Rating Methodology, the ISACA categorization of security controls and the IMO Guidelines on Maritime Cyber Risk Management.

…

This is a NetLogo 7.0.1 agent-based model of interdependent team productivity under O-ring production logic. The model asks when collective problem-solving capacity (CPS) improves team output and when its effect is constrained by trust, burnout, specialization diversity, weak-link quality, and team-formation rules. Agents are heterogeneous in skill, CPS, trust, burnout, effort, learning rate, openness, specialization, adaptability, and aspiration. Each tick forms temporary teams, computes individual contribution quality, combines contributions through a geometric O-ring production function with an explicit weakest-link term, records output and success, and updates agents through feedback, learning, trust change, burnout, recovery, and turnover. The paper follows the ODD protocol, reports exact implementation equations, and analyzes six BehaviorSpace experiments with 50 stochastic repetitions per condition. Scenario results show that CPS is beneficial but not sufficient: productivity is highest when CPS is combined with trust, low burnout, effective coordination, and a reliable weakest-link floor. Diversity yields only modest gains at low CPS but larger gains when CPS is high. Formation-mode results are especially informative because mixed CPS-skill formation maximizes total output, whereas random formation has the highest binary success rate, showing that output magnitude and threshold success can diverge. The study contributes a transparent computational mechanism linking collective intelligence with O-ring production and identifies boundary conditions under which high-CPS teams can still be limited by weak links and interdependence.

MOSAIC is an agent-based NetLogo model of decentralized mission coordination among heterogeneous robots operating under partial observability, limited energy, spatially variable risk, dynamic communication, and individual and cooperative task requirements. Robots discover tasks locally, exchange task information through temporary communication links, submit capability-, energy-, deadline-, and risk-aware bids, compete for individual contracts, and form temporary coalitions for cooperative tasks.

The model integrates decentralized auctions, greedy capability-based coalition formation, contract release and reassignment, four reward regimes, reputation, adaptive bidding strategies, failure traceability, and mission-, network-, information-, inequality-, and coalition-level metrics. It operates without a centralized mission planner or global combinatorial assignment solver.

Seven paired-seed BehaviorSpace experiments comprising 690 official simulation runs evaluate baseline mission viability, reward regimes, communication structure, capability heterogeneity, cooperative-task demand, reputation and adaptive strategies, and mission-incentive strength. The results indicate that structural coordination capacity—particularly information reach, capability compatibility, and feasible coalition construction—has a stronger effect on mission completion than increasing incentive intensity within the tested architecture and parameter ranges.

…

This model is an extension of Wilensky’s (2003) Traffic Grid, a foundational NetLogo model of urban traffic flow. It embeds a dual-process cognitive architecture into each driver agent, transforming the original’s identical reactive units into cognitively heterogeneous individuals whose internal mental state evolves with experience; making the same intersection produce different decisions from different drivers, and different decisions from the same driver across occasions.
The core question the model addresses is the yellow-light dilemma zone: the seconds following amber onset in which a driver can neither stop safely nor clear the intersection before red. Field research documents that behavioral variance at this moment cannot be explained by geometry or legal obligation alone. This model provides the cognitive architecture that has been missing from traffic ABMs.
Each driver routes every amber-onset decision through either System 1 (fast, heuristic, automatic) or System 2 (slow, deliberative, prospect-theoretic), switching dynamically based on cognitive load, accumulated near-miss memory, and situational framing. The result is crash outcomes that are attributable, path-dependent, and sensitive to both driver disposition and signal infrastructure; none of which fixed-rule models can reproduce. Three signal control modes are included: fixed-cycle (replicating Wilensky’s original), adaptive-queue, and smart occupancy-based switching.

An agent-based model of saving and dissaving behaviour under quasi-hyperbolic (β–δ) discounting. Building on the individual decision problem of Cao and Werning (2018), the model embeds present-biased agents in a Watts–Strogatz small-world network and adds three configurable mechanisms of social influence — information diffusion, peer comparison, and social-norm conformity — across five heterogeneous behavioural profiles (Planners, Moderates, Procrastinators, Inverse Procrastinators, and Impulsive agents).
Each profile’s saving policy is approximated by value-function iteration over a discretised wealth grid; the solved policies are cached and applied as agents interact over their network neighbourhoods. The model tests whether each social mechanism can alter the saving and wealth trajectories that present-biased agents would otherwise follow in isolation, and characterises the direction and size of each effect on median wealth, wealth inequality (Gini), and the incidence of severely depleted agents.
The deposit includes the core model (Model.py), an analysis and visualisation pipeline (analyze_results.py), a standalone ODD description (ODD.md), and pinned dependencies.

This model visualizes gradient descent optimization - the fundamental algorithm used to train neural networks and other machine learning models. Agents represent different optimization algorithms searching for the minimum of a loss landscape (the “error surface” that ML models try to minimize during training).

The model demonstrates how different optimizer types (SGD, Momentum with different parameters) behave on various loss landscapes, from simple bowls to the notoriously difficult Rosenbrock “banana valley” function. This helps build intuition about why certain optimization algorithms work better than others for different problem geometries.

HOW IT WORKS

…

The Agent-Based Model for Multiple Team Membership (ABMMTM) simulates design teams searching for viable design solutions, for a large design project that requires multiple design teams that are working simultaneously, under different organizational structures; specifically, the impact of multiple team membership (MTM). The key mechanism under study is how individual agent-level decision-making impacts macro-level project performance, specifically, wage cost. Each agent follows a stochastic learning approach, akin to simulated annealing or reinforcement learning, where they iteratively explore potential design solutions. The agent evaluates new solutions based on a random-walk exploration, accepting improvements while rejecting inferior designs. This iterative process simulates real-world problem-solving dynamics where designers refine solutions based on feedback.

As a proof-of-concept demonstration of assessing the macro-level effects of MTM in organizational design, we developed this agent-based simulation model which was used in a simulation experiment. The scenario is a system design project involving multiple interdependent teams of engineering designers. In this scenario, the required system design is split into three separate but interdependent systems, e.g., the design of a satellite could (trivially) be split into three components: power source, control system, and communication systems; each of three design team is in charge of a design of one of these components. A design team is responsible for ensuring its proposed component’s design meets the design requirement; they are not responsible for the design requirements of the other components. If the design of a given component does not affect the design requirements of the other components, we call this the uncoupled scenario; otherwise, it is a coupled scenario.

Reducing packaging waste is a critical challenge that requires organizations to collaborate within circular ecosystems, considering social, economic, and technical variables like decision-making behavior, material prices, and available technologies. Agent-Based Modeling (ABM) offers a valuable methodology for understanding these complex dynamics. In our research, we have developed an ABM to explore circular ecosystems’ potential in reducing packaging waste, using a case study of the Dutch food packaging ecosystem. The model incorporates three types of agents—beverage producers, packaging producers, and waste treaters—who can form closed-loop recycling systems.

Beverage Producer Agents: These agents represent the beverage company divided into five types based on packaging formats: cans, PET bottles, glass bottles, cartons, and bag-in-boxes. Each producer has specific packaging demands based on product volume, type, weight, and reuse potential. They select packaging suppliers annually, guided by deterministic decision styles: bargaining (seeking the lowest price) or problem-solving (prioritizing high recycled content).

Packaging Producer Agents: These agents are responsible for creating packaging using either recycled or virgin materials. The model assumes a mix of monopolistic and competitive market situations, with agents calculating annual material needs. Decision styles influence their choices: bargaining agents compare recycled and virgin material costs, while problem-solving agents prioritize maximum recycled content. They calculate recycled content in packaging and set prices accordingly, ensuring all produced packaging is sold within or outside the model.

…

Hierarchical problem-solving model
The model simulates a hierarchical problem-solving process in which a manager delegates parts of a problem to specialists, who attempt to solve specific aspects based on their unique skills. The goal is to examine how effectively the hierarchical structure works in solving the problem, the total cost of the process, and the resulting solution quality.

Problem-solving random network model
The model simulates a network of agents (generalists) who collaboratively solve a fixed problem by iterating over it and using their individual skills to reduce the problem’s complexity. The goal is to study the dynamics of the problem-solving process, including agent interactions, work cycles, total cost, and solution quality.

This model was designed to study resilience in organizations. Inspired by ethnographic work, it follows the simple goal to understand whether team structure affects the way in which tasks are performed. In so doing, it compares the ‘hybrid’ data-inspired structure with three more traditional structures (i.e. hierarchy, flexible/relaxed hierarchy, and anarchy/disorganization).