Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33678813›Full record

ArticleGeographical analysis2021

Future Developments in Geographical Agent-Based Models: Challenges and Opportunities.

Alison Heppenstall, Andrew Crooks, Nick Malleson, Ed Manley, Jiaqi Ge, Michael Batty

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Geographical analysis, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. An analysis of spatial and temporal uncertainty propagation in agent-based models.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Making Space in Geographical Analysis.Geographical analysis · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Alison HeppenstallSchool of Geography University of Leeds Leeds U.K.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0663-3437
Andrew CrooksDepartment of Computational and Data Sciences and Department of Geography and Geoinformation Science George Mason University Fairfax VA USA.
Nick MallesonSchool of Geography University of Leeds Leeds U.K.
Ed ManleySchool of Geography University of Leeds Leeds U.K.
Jiaqi GeSchool of Geography University of Leeds Leeds U.K.
Michael BattyCentre for Advanced Spatial Analysis (CASA) University College London London U.K.

Funding

Chief Scientist Office SPHSU20Medical Research Council MC_UU_00022/5Medical Research Council MR/S037578/2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite reaching a point of acceptance as a research tool across the geographical and social sciences, there remain significant methodological challenges for agent-based models. These include recognizing and simulating emergent phenomena, agent representation, construction of behavioral rules, and calibration and validation. While advances in individual-level data and computing power have opened up new research avenues, they have also brought with them a new set of challenges. This article reviews some of the challenges that the field has faced, the opportunities available to advance the state-of-the-art, and the outlook for the field over the next decade. We argue that although agent-based models continue to have enormous promise as a means of developing dynamic spatial simulations, the field needs to fully embrace the potential offered by approaches from machine learning to allow us to fully broaden and deepen our understanding of geographical systems.

Identifiers

PMID33678813
PMCPMC7898830

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.