MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3147970983 · doi:10.1109/wsc.2007.4419891

A comparison between system dynamics and agent based modeling and opportunities for cross-fertilization

2007· article· en· W3147970983 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venue2007 Winter Simulation Conference · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUrban and Freight Transport Logistics
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePoint (geometry)Work (physics)Statement (logic)Dynamics (music)Simple (philosophy)System dynamicsManagement scienceData scienceArtificial intelligenceEpistemologyEngineeringMathematicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary form only given. This work proposes a systematic approach to identify opportunities for cross-fertilization between two modeling paradigms: system dynamics and agent-based modeling. The motivation for this work is the authors' belief that there are gains to be made by crossing the boundaries between different domains of research, or different scientific approaches. This paper presents a comparison between the two modeling approaches, which is brought one step beyond the simple statement of the similarities and differences between them by introducing the novel aspect of taking a synergistic view specifically aimed at identifying a list of likely opportunities for cross-fertilization. The list presented here is not exhaustive and should be regarded more as a starting point than an ending point, and an invitation to other scientists to take such synergistic views even further.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.803
Threshold uncertainty score0.533

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.178
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.138 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it