The model explores the impact of public disclosure on tax compliance among diverse agents, including individual taxpayers and a tax authority. It incorporates heterogeneous preferences and income endowments among taxpayers, captured through a utility function that considers psychic costs subtracted from expected pecuniary utility. These costs include moral, reciprocity, and stigma costs associated with norm violations, leading to variations in taxpayers’ risk attitudes and related parameters. The tax authority’s attributes, such as the frequency of random audits, penalty rate, and the choice between partial or full disclosure, remain fixed throughout the simulation. Income endowments and preference parameters are randomly assigned to taxpayers at the outset.

Taxpayers maximize their expected utility by reporting income, taking into account tax, penalty, and audit rates. They make annual decisions based on their own and their peers’ behaviors from the previous year. Taxpayers indirectly interact at the societal level through public disclosure conducted by the tax authority, exchanging tax information among peers. Each period in the simulation collects data on total reported income, average compliance rates per income group, distribution of compliance rates, counts of compliers, full evaders, partial evaders, and the numbers of taxpayers experiencing guilt and anger. The model evaluates whether public disclosure positively or negatively impacts compliance rates and quantifies this impact based on aggregated individual reporting behaviors.

MASTOC-LLM extends the classic Multi-Agent System Tragedy of the Commons (MASTOC) model by replacing hard-coded behavioral rules with autonomous decision-making powered by large language models (LLMs). Three heterogeneous agents manage herds of cows on a shared grassland commons. Each tick, an agent receives a structured prompt describing current resource levels, its own herd size, peer behavior, and — optionally — a rolling memory of recent rounds and messages from neighboring agents. The LLM returns a stocking decision (add, remove, or hold cows) together with a natural-language rationale and, when communication is enabled, a short message to broadcast to peers.

The model is designed to test whether LLM agents spontaneously develop Ostrom-style common-pool resource governance (mutual monitoring, graduated sanctions, graduated rule revision) or instead fall into identifiable failure modes. Preliminary experiments with Claude Haiku 4.5, GPT-5.4-mini, and DeepSeek R1:32b have revealed four recurring collapse patterns — Cooperative Paralysis, Defection Cascade, Overshoot-Panic, and Hybrid Architecture Failure — whose onset timing is sensitive to memory length, inter-agent communication, and the post-training alignment approach of the underlying model.

MASTOC-LLM is intended as a laboratory for generative agent-based modelling (GABM) methodology: it provides a clean, well-understood commons baseline against which LLM behavioral hypotheses can be systematically tested and compared across models, parameter sweeps, and alignment regimes.

Simulations based on the Axelrod model and extensions to inspect the volatility of the features over time (AXELROD MODEL & Agreement threshold & two model variations based on the Social identity approach)
The Axelrod model is used to predict the number of changes per feature in comparison to the datasets and is used to compare different model variations and their performance.

Input: Real data

…

Overview

Purpose

Modeling an economy with stable macro signals, that works as a benchmark for studying the effects of the agent activities, e.g. extortion, at the service of the elaboration of public policies..
…

The present model was created and used for the study titled ``Agent-Based Insight into Eco-Choices: Simulating the Fast Fashion Shift.” The model is implemented in the multi-agent programmable environment NetLogo 6.3.0. The model is designed to simulate the behavior and decision-making processes of individuals (agents) in a social network. It focuses on how agents interact with their peers, social media, and government campaigns, specifically regarding their likelihood to purchase fast fashion.

Objective is to simulate policy interventions in an integrated demand-supply model. The underlying demand function links both sides. Diffusion proceeds if interactions distribute awareness (Epidemic effect) and rivalry reduces the market price (Probit effect). Endogeneity is given due to the fact that consumer awareness as well as their willingness-to-pay drives supply-side rivalry. Firm´s entry and exit decisions as well as quantity and price settings are driven by Cournot competition.

This Repast Simphony model simulates genomic admixture during the farming expansion of human groups from mainland Asia into the Papuan dominated islands of Southeast Asia during the Neolithic period.

Innovation a byproduct of the intellectual capital, requires a new paradigm for the production constituents. Human Capital HC,Structural capital SC and relational capital RC become key for intellectual capital and consequently for innovation.

STiMUS-HAI (Stigmergic–Mutualistic IMOI Model, Human-AI extension) is an agent-based model of teamwork in socio-technical systems where human and AI contributors collaborate through shared digital artefacts — wiki pages, code files, issue tickets, project cards, Scratch projects — represented as patches in a NetLogo world. It extends the human-only base model STiMUS v2.2, which established that two coordination mechanisms — stigmergy (indirect coordination through traces left in the environment) and mutualism (mutual benefit between contributors and the artefacts they tend) — can be decoupled: stigmergy decides where a contributor works, mutualism decides with what effort. STiMUS-HAI preserves this decoupling unchanged and adds two further theoretical questions: whether mixing AI agents into a human team distorts human coordination in ways that aggregate indicators hide, and whether AI’s cost to team outcomes depends on the type of work AI performs, not only on how much of it is present.

Two breeds of turtle — humans and ai-agents — follow identical target-selection, pheromone, and mutualism rules, so that any behavioural difference is attributable to team composition rather than a built-in advantage. The one designed asymmetry: AI agents never accumulate shared-mental-model and their motivation is fixed rather than adaptive. On top of this v3.0 baseline, v3.1 adds a task-type dimension to artefacts (“prediction” versus “judgment”, set via a judgment-share slider) that scales down AI edit-power specifically on judgment-requiring artefacts, and an ai-trust mechanic: humans build or lose trust in AI contributions based on the population-relative percentile rank of observed AI work quality (bottom-quartile work counts as an observed “error”), and that trust gates how much mutualistic benefit a human derives from continuing an AI’s work. Trust erodes quickly on a single error and recovers only after a streak of confirmed successes — an intentional asymmetry.

An agent based simulation of a political process based on stakeholder narratives