Two Modes of Scheduling in a Simple Economic Agent-Based Model

Sarah Wolf, Steffen Fürst, Sophie Knell, Wiebke Lass, Daniel Lincke, Antoine Mandel, Jonas Teitge, Carlo Jaeger

Abstract

Agent-based models (ABMs), and with them simulation, are gaining importance in economics. As they allow to study coordination problems in a dynamic setting, they can be helpful tools for identifying win-win strategies for climate policy. This paper argues that strongly simplified models can support a better understanding of economic ABMs. We present work in progress on an example case: while in economic systems in the real world many actions and interactions by various agents take place in parallel, often ABMs use sequential computation. With a simple economic agent-based model of firms that trade and produce goods, we explore and discuss two alternative modes of scheduling: the timetable model, where all agents complete one step after the other, and the heliotropic model, where one agent after the other completes steps. We find that the timetable model is better suited for working with data from national statistics, while the heliotropic model dispenses with random shuffling that is often introduced to guarantee symmetric expectations for agents. The latter can be used in a completely deterministic fashion, providing a baseline case for studying the system’s dynamics.

References

  1. Balbi, S. and Giupponi, C. (2009). Reviewing agent-based modelling of socio-ecosystems: a methodology for the analysis of climate change adaptation and sustainability. Working Papers Department of Economics, Ca' Foscari University of Venice No. 15/WP/2009. ISSN 1827-3580.
  2. Boero, R. and Squazzoni, F. (2005). Does Empirical Embeddedness Matter? Methodological Issues on AgentBased Models for Analytical Social Science. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 8(4).
  3. Capros, P., Georgakopoulos, T., Filippoupolitis, A., Kotsomiti, S., Atsavesand, G., Proost, S., Van Regemorter, D., Conrad, K., and Schmidt, T. (1999). The GEM-E3 model: reference manual.
  4. Dawid, H., Gemkow, S., Harting, P., and Neugart, M. (2011). Labor market integration policies and the convergence of regions. Journal of Evolutionary Economics. Online first.
  5. Epstein, J. M. (2006). Remarks on the foundations of agentbased generative social science. In Tesfatsion, L. and Judd, K., editors, Agent-Based Computational Economics. Elsevier, North-Holland.
  6. Fagiolo, G., Windrum, P., and Moneta, A. (2006). Empirical Validation of Agent-Based Models: A Critical Survey. LEM Working Paper Series, 14.
  7. Gintis, H. (2007). The Dynamics of General Equilibrium. Economic Journal, 117(523):1280-1309.
  8. Jaeger, C. C. (2012). Scarcity and coordination in the global commons. In: see right below. pp. 85-101.
  9. Jaeger, C. C., Hasselmann, K., Leipold, G., Mangalagiu, D., and Tábara, J. D. (2012). Reframing the Problem of Climate Change: From Zero Sum Game to Win-Win Solutions. Routledge.
  10. Jaeger, C. C., Paroussos, L., Mangalagiu, D., Kupers, R., Mandel, A., and Tábara, J. D. (2010). The Europe Mitigation Project - Assessing the growth and job implications of moving the European climate target from -20% to -30%. German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety, Berlin. see www.newgrowthpath.eu.
  11. Kirman, A. P. (1992). Whom or what does the representative individual represent? The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 6(2):117-136.
  12. Mandel, A., Fürst, S., Lass, W., Meissner, F., and Jaeger, C. C. (2009). Lagom generiC: an agent-based model of growing economies. ECF Working Paper, 1.
  13. Mathieu, P. and Secq, Y. (2012). Environment updating and agent scheduling policies in agent-based simulators. ICAART, 2:170-175.
  14. Nordhaus, W. (2008). A question of balance: Weighing the options on global warming policies.
  15. Ormerod, P., Rosewell, B., and Phelps, P. (2009). Inflation/unemployment regimes and the instability of the philipps curve. Economics E-Journal Discussion Paper, No. 2009-43.
  16. Shi, H. and Zhang, Y. (2011). How Carbon Emission Mitigation Promotes Economic Development - A Theoretical Framework. Draft.
  17. Stern, N. (2007). The Economics of Climate Change. The Stern Review. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
  18. Tesfatsion, L. (2006). Agent-based computational economics: A constructive approach to economic theory. In Tesfatsion, L. and Judd, K., editors, Agent-Based Computational Economics. Elsevier, North-Holland.
  19. Wolf, S., Fürst, S., Mandel, A., Lass, W., Lincke, D., PabloMartì, F., and Jaeger, C. (2012). A multi-agent model of several economic regions. Submitted to Environmental Modeling and Software.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Wolf S., Fürst S., Knell S., Lass W., Lincke D., Mandel A., Teitge J. and Jaeger C. (2012). Two Modes of Scheduling in a Simple Economic Agent-Based Model . In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Simulation and Modeling Methodologies, Technologies and Applications - Volume 1: SIMULTECH, ISBN 978-989-8565-20-4, pages 303-308. DOI: 10.5220/0004032203030308


in Bibtex Style

@conference{simultech12,
author={Sarah Wolf and Steffen Fürst and Sophie Knell and Wiebke Lass and Daniel Lincke and Antoine Mandel and Jonas Teitge and Carlo Jaeger},
title={Two Modes of Scheduling in a Simple Economic Agent-Based Model},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Simulation and Modeling Methodologies, Technologies and Applications - Volume 1: SIMULTECH,},
year={2012},
pages={303-308},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0004032203030308},
isbn={978-989-8565-20-4},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Simulation and Modeling Methodologies, Technologies and Applications - Volume 1: SIMULTECH,
TI - Two Modes of Scheduling in a Simple Economic Agent-Based Model
SN - 978-989-8565-20-4
AU - Wolf S.
AU - Fürst S.
AU - Knell S.
AU - Lass W.
AU - Lincke D.
AU - Mandel A.
AU - Teitge J.
AU - Jaeger C.
PY - 2012
SP - 303
EP - 308
DO - 10.5220/0004032203030308