Agents in Social Science
93
collected taxes over a population of 400 agents. Their results showed that
using high tax rates was good for the population to survive, but poor agents
struggled to survive [16, 3].
Buzing et al. [36] showed learning and communication influencing agents.
Only certain agent populations were allowed to learn new strategies from other
agents. The results showed that evolution only influenced those agents who
listened. Increasing the communication among agents increased cooperation
among the population, depicting that societies with no or little communication find it difficult to survive. These results are similar to those provided by
Noble [142]. Hales [80] used the Sugarscape society with memetic algorithms
to display propagation of cultural information among the population.
The Sugarscape was also heavily criticized in [168] saying that it was too
restrictive to be used as an economic analysis model. This is because some
results of the model showed lack of steady-state behavior in some scenarios.
They claimed that as Sugarscape omitted existing economic theories, it could
not be used for testing. Beinhocker [21] argued that Epstein and Axtell had
not expected that Sugarscape would become a model for economics. Yet it
was able to produce striking results free of unrealistic assumptions found in
traditional economics. It is not based on an equilibrium system and neither
does it go into it. It is a useful model which displays complex structures,
evolving from bottom-up, using simple starting rules at low-level interactions.
Whether Sugarscape is a useful model for testing economic models is a
debatable issue. However, it is a good starting point for modeling economic
activities, where location of agents influences agent behavior. Most economic
models do not have concepts of location to see if this affects agent and resource
distribution.
5.1.1 Evolution from Bottom-Up
Sugarscape is also useful to see how societies develop and evolve. If agents
were equipped with genetic material, this could be inherited by newborn
child agents, allowing best genes to be carried onto new generations. Running such an experiment, “over a period of time, the characteristics of the
population of agents converge towards certain traits, namely good vision and
a low metabolism” [118].
Similar institutions, like banks show economic trading was an example of
emerging evolution. This was observed, when Epstein and Axtell [57] introduced the following rules:
An agent could be a lender if it is too old to have children or has more
savings than needed for reproductive purposes.
An agent could be a borrower if it has insufficient savings to produce
children, but a sufficient supply of either sugar or spice.
An interest rate could be added on loans which can be collected.
93
collected taxes over a population of 400 agents. Their results showed that
using high tax rates was good for the population to survive, but poor agents
struggled to survive [16, 3].
Buzing et al. [36] showed learning and communication influencing agents.
Only certain agent populations were allowed to learn new strategies from other
agents. The results showed that evolution only influenced those agents who
listened. Increasing the communication among agents increased cooperation
among the population, depicting that societies with no or little communication find it difficult to survive. These results are similar to those provided by
Noble [142]. Hales [80] used the Sugarscape society with memetic algorithms
to display propagation of cultural information among the population.
The Sugarscape was also heavily criticized in [168] saying that it was too
restrictive to be used as an economic analysis model. This is because some
results of the model showed lack of steady-state behavior in some scenarios.
They claimed that as Sugarscape omitted existing economic theories, it could
not be used for testing. Beinhocker [21] argued that Epstein and Axtell had
not expected that Sugarscape would become a model for economics. Yet it
was able to produce striking results free of unrealistic assumptions found in
traditional economics. It is not based on an equilibrium system and neither
does it go into it. It is a useful model which displays complex structures,
evolving from bottom-up, using simple starting rules at low-level interactions.
Whether Sugarscape is a useful model for testing economic models is a
debatable issue. However, it is a good starting point for modeling economic
activities, where location of agents influences agent behavior. Most economic
models do not have concepts of location to see if this affects agent and resource
distribution.
5.1.1 Evolution from Bottom-Up
Sugarscape is also useful to see how societies develop and evolve. If agents
were equipped with genetic material, this could be inherited by newborn
child agents, allowing best genes to be carried onto new generations. Running such an experiment, “over a period of time, the characteristics of the
population of agents converge towards certain traits, namely good vision and
a low metabolism” [118].
Similar institutions, like banks show economic trading was an example of
emerging evolution. This was observed, when Epstein and Axtell [57] introduced the following rules:
An agent could be a lender if it is too old to have children or has more
savings than needed for reproductive purposes.
An agent could be a borrower if it has insufficient savings to produce
children, but a sufficient supply of either sugar or spice.
An interest rate could be added on loans which can be collected.