Cited by 161Multi-Agent Systems and NegotiationSimulation Techniques and ApplicationsPhilosophy of Biology and Scientific Explanation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 80 of the 83 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

On agent-based modeling and computational social science

Open access
Conte, Rosaria, Paolucci, Mario·2014·Frontiers in Psychology

Abstract

In the first part of the paper, the field of agent-based modeling (ABM) is discussed focusing on the role of generative theories, aiming at explaining phenomena by growing them. After a brief analysis of the major strengths of the field some crucial weaknesses are analyzed. In particular, the generative power of ABM is found to have been underexploited, as the pressure for simple recipes has prevailed and shadowed the application of rich cognitive models. In the second part of the paper, the renewal of interest for Computational Social Science (CSS) is focused upon, and several of its variants, such as deductive, generative, and complex CSS, are identified and described. In the concluding remarks, an interdisciplinary variant, which takes after ABM, reconciling it with the quantitative one, is proposed as a fundamental requirement for a new program of the CSS.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00668

Cites

80 of 80 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

  • Intelligent agents: theory and practice

    Wooldridge, M., & Jennings, N. R. (1995) · The Knowledge Engineering Review · doi:10.1017/s0269888900008122 · Cited by 6,810 · cited 1×

    “Agents also differ in their level of complexity: according to a classic distinction introduced by Wooldridge and Jennings in their influential work (Wooldridge and Jennings, 1995), agents in a “strong” sense are capable to manipulate and reason upon mental representations; otherwise they are…”
    Background
  • Epidemic Spreading in Scale-Free Networks

    Pastor‐Satorras, R., & Vespignani, A. (2001) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.86.3200 · Cited by 5,785 · cited 4×

    “, 2010) and that of epidemics (Pastor-Satorras and Vespignani, 2001).”
    BackgroundInfluential
  • Simulating dynamical features of escape panic

    Helbing, D., Farkas, I. J., & Vicsek, T. (2000) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35035023 · Cited by 5,005 · cited 1×

    “The popularity of sociophysics grew even more under the influence of success stories, especially concerning the domain of pedestrians’ crowd (Helbing et al., 2000) and that of epidemics (Pastor-Satorras and Vespignani, 2001).”
    Background
  • Dynamic models of segregation

    Schelling, T. (1971) · Journal of Mathematical Sociology · doi:10.1080/0022250x.1971.9989794 · Cited by 4,966 · cited 1×

    “Examples of this application of ABM abound and are among the best cited works so far worked out in this field. phenomena trace back to as early as 1971, when the famous (Schelling, 1971) model of segregation was published in the Journal of Mathematical Sociology.”
    Background
  • Agent-based modeling: Methods and techniques for simulating human systems

    Bonabeau, E. (2002) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.082080899 · Cited by 4,500 · cited 2×

    “…acknowledgment, when the proceedings of a Sackler Colloqium of the National Academy of Sciences, under the title “Adaptive Agents, Intelligence, and Emergent Human Organization: Capturing Complexity through Agent-Based Modeling,” held in October 2001, were published on PNAS (Bonabeau, 2002).”
    Background
  • Statistical physics of social dynamics

    Castellano, C., Fortunato, S., & Loreto, V. (2009) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.81.591 · Cited by 4,119 · cited 2×

    “Again, current models (Deffuant et al., 2001; Galam, 2002; Hegselmann and Krause, 2002; Castellano et al., 2009), find that the structure of the network of communication affects opinion dynamics.”
    BackgroundMethod
  • Computational social science

    Lazer, D., Pentland, A., Adamic, L., Aral, S., Barabási, A.-L., Brewer, D., Christakis, N., Contractor, N., Fowler, J., Gutmann, M., et al. (2009) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1167742 · Cited by 3,365

  • Evolution of indirect reciprocity by image scoring

    Nowak, M. A., & Sigmund, K. (1998) · Nature · doi:10.1038/31225 · Cited by 2,700 · cited 2×

    “…to emerge from a set of heterogeneous strategies, from TIT-FOR-TAT (Axelrod, 1997) to strong reciprocity (Boyd et al., 2003), from image-scoring (Nowak and Sigmund, 1998) to reputation-building (Pinyol et al., 2012), and finally group selection (Di Tosto et al., 2007); social control is found…”
    Background
  • Opinion Dynamics and Bounded Confidence Models, Analysis and Simulation

    Hegselmann, R., & Krause, U. (2002) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 2,366

  • Computer science as empirical inquiry

    Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1976) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/360018.360022 · Cited by 2,351 · cited 1×

    “Inductive computational science is certainly not new (Newell and Simon, 1976).”
    Background

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 83 references

3 of the 83 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Epstein, 2008, Why model?, JASSS, 11
  2. 2010, Computational Social Science
  3. Helbing, 2011b, How to do agent-based simulations in the future: from modeling social mechanisms to emergent phenomena and interactive systems design

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Conte, R., & Paolucci, M.
Affiliations
National Research Council (IT)
Corresponding author
Paolucci, Mario
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Published
2014-07-14
Volume
5
Pages
668-668
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3124521395
Cited by
160
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 2
FWCI
9.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • European Commission (284709)
  • Programma Operativo Nazionale Ricerca e Competitività (2007-2013)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Simulation Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy of Biology and Scientific Explanation
Keywords
agent-based modeling, computational social science, generative theory, generative power, cognitive models, interdisciplinary research, quantitative social science

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