IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v202y2007i3p385-396.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A methodology for developing simulation models of complex systems

Author

Listed:
  • Aumann, Craig A.

Abstract

While the complexity of ecological simulation models has increased along with advances in computer hardware, recent reviews have concluded that such complex models have generally not fulfilled their potential for advancing ecological understanding. This state of affairs is partially the result of little attention being given to methodological issues for developing simulation models. This paper presents one methodology for developing models of complex systems. The first part of this methodology places the modeling process in the context of general research planning and thus emphasizes the process of synthesis—combining the constituent pieces of knowledge into a unified description of the entities and processes comprising the system to be modeled. The second methodological step involves operationalizing this synthetic description into a composition of smaller models specified over three scalar hierarchical levels. The hierarchical structure of the decomposition also structures the explanations given about system behaviors in that the “mechanism” for a behavior arises at the lower levels while its “purpose” is found at higher levels. The third part of the methodology involves using model assessment to explicitly establish the veracity of the links between the implemented model, the model design specification, and the synthesis. The veracity of these links are established by demonstrating: (i) that the model has been built correctly relative to the model design (verification), (ii) that the right model has been built as judged by the behaviors of the model components across the hierarchical levels (validation), and (iii) that the assessment criteria used are credible for judging model adequacy for the stated modeling objectives (critique). By creating confidence in the mapping between the model implementation and synthesis, the assessment process enables confidence in the explanations given for model behaviors and the theoretical understanding expressed in the synthesis. Alternatively, the failure of the model to satisfy assessment criteria may necessitate a reformulation of the understanding on which the model is based. Regardless of which possibility occurs, because the reasons for model behaviors can be mapped back to the synthesis, ecological understanding is advanced.

Suggested Citation

  • Aumann, Craig A., 2007. "A methodology for developing simulation models of complex systems," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 202(3), pages 385-396.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:202:y:2007:i:3:p:385-396
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.11.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380006005400
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.11.005?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kleijnen, Jack P. C., 1995. "Verification and validation of simulation models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 145-162, April.
    2. Cartwright,Nancy, 1999. "The Dappled World," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521643368, October.
    3. Cartwright,Nancy, 1999. "The Dappled World," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521644112, October.
    4. George B. Kleindorfer & Liam O'Neill & Ram Ganeshan, 1998. "Validation in Simulation: Various Positions in the Philosophy of Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(8), pages 1087-1099, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Smajgl, Alex & House, Alan P.N. & Butler, James R.A., 2011. "Implications of ecological data constraints for integrated policy and livelihoods modelling: An example from East Kalimantan, Indonesia," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(3), pages 888-896.
    2. Igor Lugo & Gustavo Martínez-Mekler, 2022. "Theoretical study of the effect of ports in the formation of city systems," Journal of Shipping and Trade, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 1-16, December.
    3. Saldaña, A. & Ibáñez, J.J., 2007. "Pedodiversity, connectance and spatial variability of soil properties, what is the relationship?," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 208(2), pages 342-352.
    4. Conner, Mary M. & Ebinger, Michael R. & Knowlton, Frederick F., 2008. "Evaluating coyote management strategies using a spatially explicit, individual-based, socially structured population model," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 219(1), pages 234-247.
    5. Lin, Jian-Hao & Quan, Yu-Juan & Han, Bo-Ping, 2024. "MetaIBM: A Python-based library for individual-based modelling of eco-evolutionary dynamics in spatial-explicit metacommunities," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 492(C).
    6. Liliana Perez & Suzana Dragicevic & Jonathan Gaudreau, 2019. "A geospatial agent-based model of the spatial urban dynamics of immigrant population: A study of the island of Montreal, Canada," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-23, July.
    7. Ginzburg, Lev R. & Jensen, Christopher X.J. & Yule, Jeffrey V., 2007. "Aiming the “unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics” at ecological theory," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 207(2), pages 356-362.
    8. Luedeling, Eike & Smethurst, Philip J. & Baudron, Frédéric & Bayala, Jules & Huth, Neil I. & van Noordwijk, Meine & Ong, Chin K. & Mulia, Rachmat & Lusiana, Betha & Muthuri, Catherine & Sinclair, Ferg, 2016. "Field-scale modeling of tree–crop interactions: Challenges and development needs," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 51-69.
    9. Augusiak, Jacqueline & Van den Brink, Paul J. & Grimm, Volker, 2014. "Merging validation and evaluation of ecological models to ‘evaludation’: A review of terminology and a practical approach," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 280(C), pages 117-128.
    10. Lorena Cadavid & Luisa Díez-Echavarría & Alejandro Valencia, 2017. "Spin-Off Activities At Higher Educational Institutions: Performance Implications From A Modeling Perspective," Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship (JDE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 22(02), pages 1-21, June.
    11. Bartsev, Sergey I. & Degermendzhi, Andrey G. & Erokhin, Dmitry V., 2008. "Principle of the worst scenario in the modelling past and future of biosphere dynamics," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 216(2), pages 160-171.
    12. Troost, Christian & Huber, Robert & Bell, Andrew R. & van Delden, Hedwig & Filatova, Tatiana & Le, Quang Bao & Lippe, Melvin & Niamir, Leila & Polhill, J. Gareth & Sun, Zhanli & Berger, Thomas, 2023. "How to keep it adequate: A protocol for ensuring validity in agent-based simulation," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 159, pages 1-21.
    13. Santos, Mário & Bastos, Rita & Cabral, João Alexandre, 2013. "Converting conventional ecological datasets in dynamic and dynamic spatially explicit simulations: Current advances and future applications of the Stochastic Dynamic Methodology (StDM)," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 258(C), pages 91-100.
    14. Ives, M.C. & Scandol, J.P. & Greenville, J., 2013. "A bio-economic management strategy evaluation for a multi-species, multi-fleet fishery facing a world of uncertainty," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 256(C), pages 69-84.
    15. Christian Dupraz & Kevin J. Wolz & Isabelle Lecomte & Grégoire Talbot & Grégoire Vincent & Rachmat Mulia & François Bussière & Harry Ozier-Lafontaine & Sitraka Andrianarisoa & Nick Jackson & Gerry Law, 2019. "Hi-sAFe: A 3D Agroforestry Model for Integrating Dynamic Tree–Crop Interactions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-25, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Giandomenica Becchio, 2020. "The Two Blades of Occam's Razor in Economics: Logical and Heuristic," Economic Thought, World Economics Association, vol. 9(1), pages 1-17, July.
    2. Julian Reiss, 2001. "Natural economic quantities and their measurement," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 287-311.
    3. Florian Ellsaesser & Eric W. K. Tsang & Jochen Runde, 2014. "Models of causal inference: Imperfect but applicable is better than perfect but inapplicable," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(10), pages 1541-1551, October.
    4. Stephen Pratten, 2007. "Realism, closed systems and abstraction," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 473-497.
    5. Kinouchi, Renato, 2018. "Philosophical issues related to risks and values," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 90470, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Marcel Boumans & Mary Morgan, 2002. "Ceteris paribus conditions: materiality and the application of economic theories," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 11-26.
    7. Peter C. B. Phillips, 2003. "Laws and Limits of Econometrics," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(486), pages 26-52, March.
    8. Midgley, Gerald, 2008. "Response to paper "Systems thinking" by D. Cabrera et al.:: The unification of systems thinking: Is there gold at the end of the rainbow?," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 317-321, August.
    9. Nicolas Brisset, 2018. "Models as speech acts: the telling case of financial models," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(1), pages 21-41, January.
    10. Toby Ord & Rafaela Hillerbrand & Anders Sandberg, 2010. "Probing the improbable: methodological challenges for risks with low probabilities and high stakes," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 191-205, March.
    11. Enzo Lenine, 2020. "Modelling Coalitions: From Concept Formation to Tailoring Empirical Explanations," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-12, November.
    12. Simon Hall & Nilufa Ali & Nick Chater & Mike Oaksford, 2016. "Discounting and Augmentation in Causal Conditional Reasoning: Causal Models or Shallow Encoding?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(12), pages 1-23, December.
    13. Paul Shaffer, 2018. "Causal pluralism and mixed methods in the analysis of poverty dynamics," WIDER Working Paper Series 115, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    14. Freese, Jeremy & Peterson, David, 2017. "Replication in Social Science," SocArXiv 5bck9, Center for Open Science.
    15. Catherine Laurent & Jacques Baudry & Marielle Berriet-Solliec & Marc Kirsch & Daniel Perraud & Bruno Tinel & Aurélie Trouvé & Nicky Allsopp & Patrick Bonnafous & Françoise Burel & Maria José Carneiro , 2009. "Pourquoi s'intéresser à la notion d' « evidence-based policy » ?," Revue Tiers-Monde, Armand Colin, vol. 0(4), pages 853-873.
    16. Javier Guillermo Gómez P., 2008. ""El crecimiento económico y la supervivencia": el caso de las matemáticas y la economía," Borradores de Economia 498, Banco de la Republica de Colombia.
    17. Sang Yi, 2002. "The nature of model-based understanding in condensed matter physics," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 3(1), pages 81-91, March.
    18. Natalie B. Aviles & Isaac Ariail Reed, 2017. "Ratio via Machina: Three Standards of Mechanistic Explanation in Sociology," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 46(4), pages 715-738, November.
    19. Polly Mitchell & Anna Alexandrova, 2021. "Well-Being and Pluralism," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 22(6), pages 2411-2433, August.
    20. Theodore G. Shepherd & Elisabeth A. Lloyd, 2021. "Meaningful climate science," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 169(1), pages 1-16, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:202:y:2007:i:3:p:385-396. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.