CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 215Language and cultural evolutionMulti-Agent Systems and NegotiationArchaeology and ancient environmental studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Understanding Anasazi Culture Change Through Agent-Based Modeling

Dean, Jeffrey S., Gumerman, George J.·2000·Dynamics in Human and Primate Societies
DOI 10.1093/oso/9780195131673.003.0013
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Traditional narrative explanations of prehistory have become increasingly difficult to operationalize as models and to test against archaeological data. As such models become more sophisticated and complex, they also become less amenable to objective evaluation with anthropological data. Nor is it possible to experiment with living or prehistoric human beings or societies. Agentbased modeling offers intriguing possibilities for overcoming the experimental limitations of archaeology by representing the behavior of culturally relevant agents on landscapes. Manipulating the behavior of artificial agents on such landscapes allows us to, as it were, "rewind the tape" of sociocultural history and to experimentally examine the relative contributions of internal and external factors to sociocultural evolution (Gumerman and Kohler in press). Agent-based modeling allows the creation of variable resource (or other) landscapes that can be wholly imaginary or that can capture important aspects of real-world situations. These landscapes are populated with heterogeneous agents. Each agent is endowed with various attributes (e.g., life span, vision, movement capabilities, nutritional requirements, consumption and storage capacities) in order to replicate important features of individuals or relevant social units such as households, lineages, clans, and villages. A set of anthropologically plausible rules defines the ways in which agents interact with the environment and with one another. Alt…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/oso/9780195131673.003.0013

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 8 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–213 of 213

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Dean, J. S., & Gumerman, G. J.
Affiliations
University of Arizona (US)
Venue
Dynamics in Human and Primate Societies
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Published
2000-02-10
DOI
10.1093/oso/9780195131673.003.0013
OpenAlex
W1515173830
Cited by
215
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 15
FWCI
64.50
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Oxford University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Cultural Studies › Language and cultural evolution
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation
  • Social Sciences › Archeology › Archaeology and ancient environmental studies
Keywords
Ancestral Puebloans, social evolution, agent-based modeling, experimental archaeology, model validation, resource landscapes

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review