IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v10y2023i1d10.1057_s41599-023-02246-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Human civilization dynamics: why we have different civilization patterns in history

Author

Listed:
  • Peng Lu

    (Central South University
    Central South University
    PKU-Wuhan Institute for Artificial Intelligence
    Shaanxi University of Science and Technology)

  • Zhuo Zhang

    (Central South University
    PKU-Wuhan Institute for Artificial Intelligence)

  • Chiamaka Henrietta Onyebuchi

    (Central South University)

  • Mengdi Li

    (Central South University
    PKU-Wuhan Institute for Artificial Intelligence
    Shaanxi University of Science and Technology)

Abstract

After the Axial Age, the West moved toward continuous disunity, but China had successfully maintained a persistent unity pattern. Conventional case (history event) studies are subject to selection bias and theoretical frameworks, which is not objective narrative. We use agent-based modeling (ABM) to reveal the historical dynamics of why civilizations take on distinct patterns (unity versus disunity). In China, the Qin Dynasty (initial unity) opened the Great Unity tradition in 221 BC. Before this, there was a major chaotic period (770 BC to 221 BC) with two periods. The first period, the Spring and Autumn (770 BC to 221 BC), opened this chaotic process and indirectly led to the initial unity. Then, the second period, the Warring States period (475 BC to 221 BC), directly led to this initial unity. This work models the second period and focuses on the question of why human civilizations take on different patterns in history. Finally, we have solved the conditions and boundaries of two patterns. Based on the second period, we have different conclusions. The bellicosity threshold is around 0.2 (for the previous period, this is 0.3), and the alliance propensity threshold is around 0.8 (for the previous period, this is 0.7). Moreover, the higher winner cost (beyond 5%) makes it impossible to achieve Unity. This work has one new contribution, such as solving social knowledge. We use BP neural networks to evaluate the knowledge graph to support history learning. It explains civilization patterns for humankind.

Suggested Citation

  • Peng Lu & Zhuo Zhang & Chiamaka Henrietta Onyebuchi & Mengdi Li, 2023. "Human civilization dynamics: why we have different civilization patterns in history," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-13, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:10:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-023-02246-0
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-023-02246-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-023-02246-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-023-02246-0?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. Chiu Yu Ko & Mark Koyama & Tuan†Hwee Sng, 2018. "Unified China And Divided Europe," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 59(1), pages 285-327, February.
    2. Xavier Rubio-Campillo, 2016. "Model Selection in Historical Research Using Approximate Bayesian Computation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(1), pages 1-18, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. James Kai-sing Kung & Ömer Özak & Louis Putterman & Shuang Shi, 2020. "Millet, Rice, and Isolation: Origins and Persistence of the World's Most Enduring Mega-State," Departmental Working Papers 2016, Southern Methodist University, Department of Economics.
    2. Joel Mokyr & Guido Tabellini, 2024. "Social organizations and political institutions: why China and Europe diverged," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 91(362), pages 347-382, April.
    3. Levine, David K. & Modica, Salvatore, 2022. "Survival of the Weakest: Why the West Rules," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 394-421.
    4. Gerardo Minguela-Castro & Ruben Heradio & Carlos Cerrada, 2021. "Automated Support for Battle Operational–Strategic Decision-Making," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(13), pages 1-15, June.
    5. Moriguchi, Chiaki & Sng, Tuan-Hwee, 2022. "The Size of Polities in Historical Political Economy," CEI Working Paper Series 2022-02, Center for Economic Institutions, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    6. Cantoni, Davide & Mohr, Cathrin & Weigand, Matthias, 2019. "The Rise of Fiscal Capacity," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 172, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    7. Chen Feng & Beibei Shi & Ming Xu, 2020. "The political origin of differences in long-term economic prosperity: centralization versus decentralization," Cliometrica, Springer;Cliometric Society (Association Francaise de Cliométrie), vol. 14(3), pages 581-639, September.
    8. Hector Galindo‐Silva, 2020. "External threats, political turnover, and fiscal capacity," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(3), pages 430-462, November.
    9. Dincecco, Mark & Fenske, James & Menon, Anil, 2020. "The Columbian Exchange and conflict in Asia," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1319, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    10. Remi Jedwab & Noel D. Johnson & Mark Koyama, 2022. "The Economic Impact of the Black Death," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 60(1), pages 132-178, March.
    11. Johnson, Noel D. & Koyama, Mark, 2017. "States and economic growth: Capacity and constraints," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 1-20.
    12. Roland, Gérard & Jia, Ruixue & Xie, Yang, 2021. "A Theory of Power Structure and Institutional Compatibility: China vs. Europe Revisited," CEPR Discussion Papers 15700, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    13. Mark Koyama, 2017. "Jared Rubin: Rulers, religion, and riches: Why the West got rich and the Middle East did not?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 172(3), pages 549-552, September.
    14. Simon Carrignon & Tom Brughmans & Iza Romanowska, 2020. "Tableware trade in the Roman East: Exploring cultural and economic transmission with agent-based modelling and approximate Bayesian computation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-23, November.
    15. Mark Koyama, 2021. "Hilton L. Root: Network Origins of the Global Economy: East vs. West in a Complex Systems Perspective," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 187(3), pages 533-535, June.
    16. Jared Rubin & Debin Ma, 2017. "The Paradox of Power: Understanding Fiscal Capacity in Imperial China and Absolutist Regimes," Working Papers 17-02, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    17. Thilo R. Huning & Fabian Wahl, 2016. "You Reap What You Know: Observability of Soil Quality, and Political Fragmentation," Working Papers 0101, European Historical Economics Society (EHES).
    18. Jesús Fernández-Villaverde & Mark Koyama & Youhong Lin & Tuan-Hwee Sng, 2023. "The Fractured-Land Hypothesis," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 138(2), pages 1173-1231.
    19. Ma, Debin & Chen, Shuo, 2020. "States and Wars: China’s Long March towards Unity and its Consequences, 221 BC – 1911 AD," CEPR Discussion Papers 15187, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. Koyama, Mark, 2022. "Introduction to the special issue on culture, institutions, and religion in economic history," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 201(C), pages 105-114.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pal:palcom:v:10:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-023-02246-0. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    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.