Our mission is to help computational modelers develop, document, and share their computational models in accordance with community standards and good open science and software engineering practices. Model authors can publish their model source code in the Computational Model Library with narrative documentation as well as metadata that supports open science and emerging norms that facilitate software citation, computational reproducibility / frictionless reuse, and interoperability. Model authors can also request private peer review of their computational models. Models that pass peer review receive a DOI once published.
All users of models published in the library must cite model authors when they use and benefit from their code.
Please check out our model publishing tutorial and feel free to contact us if you have any questions or concerns about publishing your model(s) in the Computational Model Library.
Displaying 10 of 50 results quality clear search
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.
STiMUS (Stigmergic–Mutualistic IMOI Model) is an agent-based model of teamwork in socio-technical systems where contributors collaborate through shared digital artefacts — wiki pages, code files, issue tickets, project cards, Scratch projects — represented as patches in a NetLogo world. The model integrates two coordination mechanisms. Stigmergy is indirect coordination through traces left in a shared environment: each edit deposits a pheromone that diffuses to neighbouring patches and evaporates over time, so recent activity attracts further contributions. Mutualism is a reciprocal benefit loop in which valuable, well-maintained artefacts raise contributor motivation and shared understanding, while motivated contributors improve artefacts.
Contributors (turtles of the contributor breed) carry individual state: skill, motivation, shared-mental-model, specialty, benefit-gain, and an explicit-mode flag. At each tick every contributor selects a target artefact with an ant-colony-optimization-style rule weighing the artefact’s pheromone, incompleteness (1 - completeness), resource-value, and topic match between specialty and the artefact’s topic-tag; with probability p-explicit it instead takes the patch with the highest maintenance-need, modelling explicit task assignment. Each edit increases pheromone, quality, completeness and reuse-count, raises resource-value, lowers maintenance-need, and appends the editor to the artefact’s edit-authors list. When the previous last-editor-id differs from the current editor, the Edit Succession Ratio rises, the editor’s shared-mental-model grows, and a co-editing link is created — operationalising the idea that repeated cross-author succession on the same artefact builds shared understanding. Contributors’ motivation is updated from the benefit drawn from the visited artefact.
Each patch maintains a stigmergic layer (pheromone, quality, completeness, recentness, last-editor-id, edit-count, edit-authors) and a mutualistic layer (resource-value, reuse-count, maintenance-need, topic-tag), plus task flags (is-task?, task-complexity). Global monitors report the Edit Succession Ratio (ESR = cross-author-edits / total-edits, and an alternative esr-value = share of edited patches with more than one distinct author), mean-quality, mean-resource-value, a mutualism-index averaging contributor benefit and resource value, coediting-density (network density of the co-editing graph), active-pages-share, and task-completion-rate. The model logs every edit as a bipartite edge (tick, author_id, pageid, specialty, topic_tag, quality), exportable to CSV.
…
Interest-based compound economies generate monotonically increasing wealth inequality through multiplicative accumulation dynamics, yet the conditions under which gift-based reciprocal exchange outperforms such systems in collective well-being remain unquantified. We present Zensei Wago (全生和合), a seven-layer agent-based model comparing a Gift Resource Circulation (GRC) economy with a Compound Interest Circulation (CIC) economy under identical initial conditions. Across N = 5000 Monte Carlo replications (T = 700 ticks, N = 100 agents), GRC produced significantly higher collective resonance than CIC (p < 0.001, Cohen’s d = +0.171), above a critical prosocial threshold pm ≈ 0.698. Cohen’s d grows monotonically with duration — d = +1.943 at T = 1500 and d = +4.126 at T = 3000 — driven primarily by structural collapse of CIC resonance as inequality exceeds a critical Gini threshold (G > 0.333), while GRC resonance remains stable. The gift mechanism further decouples collective well-being from distributional outcomes, generating resonance through relational quality rather than material redistribution. Network topology analysis across seven configurations — combining a Watts-Strogatz rewiring sweep and a T = 1500 longitudinal replication — reveals that ring topology maximises GRC advantage (d = +1.17), that most topology-dependent reversals are transient (sparse and small-world both transition to significantly positive by T = 1500), and that a critical rewiring threshold of p ≈ 0.10–0.20 separates GRC-advantaged from GRC-disadvantaged network configurations. Scale-free networks remain persistently adverse (d = -7.24*), requiring structural redesign for gift-economy viability.
This model simulates a forest ecosystem affected by human logging. We explore different kind of approaches and their possible consequences for the ecosystem. Loggers can either be responsible or irresponsible, they will either take care to cut trees or not. In turn their actions will have consequences on the quality of the soil, the atmosphere as well as their profit made from logging. In this model we see that even careful management cannot prevent the degradation of the forest ecosystem.
LogoClim is a NetLogo model designed to be integrated into other simulations through the LevelSpace extension (Hjorth et al., 2020), providing high resolution climate data from sources validated and used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
The model simplifies and standardizes the integration of climate data into NetLogo, allowing researchers to focus their efforts on the model itself with the assurance of using reliable and widely recognized data. Although its main use is as a component of larger simulations, LogoClim also has its own graphical interface for monitoring and checking the datasets.
The climate data comes from the WorldClim 2.1 project (Fick & Hijmans, 2017), for which LogoClim works as an interface to NetLogo. The model supports all three WorldClim data series: (1) Historical Climate Data (1970 to 2000), with 12 monthly points for minimum, mean, and maximum temperature, precipitation, solar radiation, wind speed, vapor pressure, elevation, and bioclimatic variables; (2) Historical Monthly Weather Data (1951 to 2024), based on downscaling of CRU-TS-4.09, developed by the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia (Harris et al., 2020), with minimum and maximum temperature and total precipitation; and (3) Future Climate Data, based on downscaling climate projections derived from global climate models of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) (Eyring et al., 2016) for four future periods (2021 to 2040, 2041 to 2060, 2061 to 2080, and 2081 to 2100) and four scenarios based on the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs 126, 245, 370, and 585), covering minimum and maximum temperature, total precipitation, and bioclimatic variables. All series are available at multiple spatial resolutions, from 10 minutes (about 340 km² at the equator) to 30 seconds (about 1 km² at the equator).
…
The Soy2Grow ABM aims to simulate the adoption of soybean production in Flanders, Belgium. The model primarily considers two types of agents as farmers: 1) arable and 2) dairy farmers. Each farmer, based on its type, assesses the feasibility of adopting soybean cultivation. The feasibility assessment depends on many interrelated factors, including price, production costs, yield, disease, drought (i.e., environmental stress), social pressure, group formations, learning and skills, risk-taking, subsidies, target profit margins, tolerance to bad experiences, etc. Moreover, after adopting soybean production, agents will reassess their performance. If their performance is unsatisfactory, an agent may opt out of soy production. Therefore, one of the main outcomes to look for in the model is the number of adopters over time.
The main agents are farmers. Generally, factors influencing farmers’ decision-making are divided into seven main areas: 1) external environmental factors, 2) cooperation and learning (with slight differences depending on whether they are arable or dairy farmers), 3) crop-specific factors, 4) economics, 5) support frameworks, 6) behavioral factors, and 7) the role of mobile toasters (applicable only to dairy farmers).
Moreover, factors not only influence decision-making but also interact with each other. Specifically, external environmental factors (i.e., stress) will result in lower yield and quality (protein content). The reducing effect, identified during participatory workshops, can reach 50 %. Skills can grow and improve yield; however, their growth has a limit and follows different learning curves depending on how individualistic a farmer is. During participatory workshops, it was identified that, contrary to cooperative farmers, individualistic farmers may learn faster and reach their limits more quickly. Furthermore, subsidies directly affect revenues and profit margins; however, their impact may disappear when they are removed. In the case of dairy farmers, mobile toasters play an important role, adding toasting and processing costs to those producing soy for their animal feed consumption.
Last but not least, behavioral factors directly influence the final adoption decision. For example, high risk-taking farmers may adopt faster, whereas more conservative farmers may wait for their neighbors to adopt first. Farmers may evaluate their success based on their own targets and may also consider other crops rather than soy.
Hierarchical problem-solving model
The model simulates a hierarchical problem-solving process in which a manager delegates parts of a problem to specialists, who attempt to solve specific aspects based on their unique skills. The goal is to examine how effectively the hierarchical structure works in solving the problem, the total cost of the process, and the resulting solution quality.
Problem-solving random network model
The model simulates a network of agents (generalists) who collaboratively solve a fixed problem by iterating over it and using their individual skills to reduce the problem’s complexity. The goal is to study the dynamics of the problem-solving process, including agent interactions, work cycles, total cost, and solution quality.
Due to the role of education in promoting social status and facilitating upward social mobility, individuals and their families spare no effort to pursue better educational opportunities, especially in countries where education is highly competitive.
In China, the enrollment of senior high schools and universities mainly follows a ranking system based on students’ scores in national entrance exams (Zhongkao and Gaokao). Typically, students with higher scores have priority in choosing schools and endeavor to get into better senior high schools to increase their chances of entering a prestigious university.
However, students can only select “better” senior high schools based on their average Gaokao grades, which are strongly influenced by the initial performance (Zhongkao grades) of enrolled students. The true quality indicator of school education (schooling effect, defined as the grade improvement achieved through education at the senior high school) is unknowable. This raises the first question: will school rankings reflect the real educational quality of schools over decades of educational competition, or merely the initial quality of the students they enroll?
…
This model is represents an effort to replicate one of the first attempts (van der Vaart 2006) to develop an agent based model of agricultural origins using principles and equations drawn from human behavioral ecology. We have taken one theory of habitat choice (Ideal Free Distribution) and applied it to human behavioral adaptations to differences in resource quality of different habitats.
This is a generic sub-model of animal territory formation. It is meant to be a reusable building block, but not in the plug-and-play sense, as amendments are likely to be needed depending on the species and region. The sub-model comprises a grid of cells, reprenting the landscape. Each cell has a “quality” value, which quantifies the amount of resources provided for a territory owner, for example a tiger. “Quality” could be prey density, shelter, or just space. Animals are located randomly in the landscape and add grid cells to their intial cell until the sum of the quality of all their cells meets their needs. If a potential new cell to be added is owned by another animal, competition takes place. The quality values are static, and the model does not include demography, i.e. mortality, mating, reproduction. Also, movement within a territory is not represented.
Displaying 10 of 50 results quality clear search