An uncertainty quantification framework for agent-based modeling and simulation in networked anagram games

References

• Alam, M., Deng, X., Philipson, C., Bassaganya-Riera, J., Bisset, K., Carbo, A., Eubank, S., Hontecillas, R., Hoops, S., Mei, Y., Abedi, V & Marathe, M. (2015). Sensitivity analysis of an enteric immunity simulator (ENISI)-based model of immune responses to helicobacter pylori infection. PloS One, 10(9), e0136139. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0136139
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, N. H. (1961). Group performance in an anagram task. The Journal of Social Psychology, 55(1), 67–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1961.9922160
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baker, A. (2016). Simplicity. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/simplicity/
   Google Scholar
• Broyden, C. G. (1967). Quasi-newton methods and their application to function minimisation. Mathematics of Computation, 21(99), 368–381. https://doi.org/10.1090/S0025-5718-1967-0224273-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cadsby, C. B., Song, F., & Tapon, F. (2007). Sorting and incentive effects of pay for performance: An experimental investigation. Academy of Management Journal, 50(2), 387–405. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.24634448
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cedeno-Mieles, V., Hu, Z., Ren, Y., Deng, X., Adiga, A., Barrett, C. L. & Self, N. (2020). Networked experiments and modeling for producing collective identity in a group of human subjects using an iterative abduction framework. Social Network Analysis and Mining (SNAM), 10(1), 43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13278-019-0620-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cedeno-Mieles, V., Hu, Z., Ren, Y., Deng, X., Adiga, A., Barrett, C. & Self, N. (2019). Mechanistic and data-driven agent-based models to explain human behavior in online networked group anagram games. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Advances in Social Network Analysis and Mining (ASONAM), Vancouver, Canada (pp. 357–364).
   Google Scholar
• Charness, G., Cobo-Reyes, R., & Jimenez, N. (2014). Identities, selection, and contributions in a public-goods game. Games and Economic Behavior, 87, 322–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geb.2014.05.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deng, X., Lin, C. D., Liu, K.-W., & Rowe, R. (2017). Additive gaussian process for computer models with qualitative and quantitative factors. Technometrics, 59(3), 283–292. https://doi.org/10.1080/00401706.2016.1211554
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deutsch, M. (1949). An experimental study of the effects of cooperation and competition upon group process. Human Relations, 2(3), 199–231. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872674900200301
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fadikar, A., Higdon, D., Chen, J., Lewis, B., Venkatramanan, S., & Marathe, M. (2018). Calibrating a stochastic, agent-based model using quantile-based emulation. SIAM/ASA Journal on Uncertainty Quantification, 6(4), 1685–1706. https://doi.org/10.1137/17M1161233
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher, R. A. (1922). On the mathematical foundations of theoretical statistics. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Series A, Containing Papers of a Mathematical or Physical Character. 222(594–604), 309–368.
   Google Scholar
• Goldman, M., Stockbauer, J. W., & McAuliffe, T. G. (1977). Intergroup and intragroup competition and cooperation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13(1), 81–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(77)90015-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gramacy, R. B. (2020). Surrogates: Gaussian process modeling, design and optimization for the applied sciences. Chapman and Hall/CRC.
   Google Scholar
• Gugole, F., Coffeng, L. E., Edeling, W., Sanderse, B., De Vlas, S. J., Crommelin, D., & Klinkenberg, D. (2021). Uncertainty quantification and sensitivity analysis of COVID-19 exit strategies in an individual-based transmission model. PloS Computational Biology, 17(9), e1009355. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009355
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartigan, J. A., & Wong, M. A. (1979). Algorithm as 136: A k-means clustering algorithm. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series C (Applied Statistics), 28(1), 100–108. https://doi.org/10.2307/2346830
   Google Scholar
• Henderson, D. A., Boys, R. J., Krishnan, K. J., Lawless, C., & Wilkinson, D. J. (2009). Bayesian emulation and calibration of a stochastic computer model of mitochondrial dna deletions in substantia nigra neurons. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 104(485), 76–87. https://doi.org/10.1198/jasa.2009.0005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• House-Peters, L. A., & Chang, H. (2011). Urban water demand modeling: Review of concepts, methods, and organizing principles. Water Resources Research, 47(5), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1029/2010WR009624
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu, Z., Deng, X., Goode, B. J., Ramakrishnan, N., Saraf, P., Self, N. & others. (2019). On the modeling and agent-based simulation of a cooperative group anagram game. In 2019 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC) National Harbor, Maryland (pp. 169–180).
   Google Scholar
• Hu, Z., Deng, X., & Kuhlman, C. J. (2021). An uncertainty quantification approach for agent-based modeling of human behavior in networked anagram games. In Proceedings of the 2021 winter simulation conference. Piscataway, New Jersey.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, B., Lin, D., & Nachtsheim, C. (2008). Bayesian d-optimal supersaturated designs. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 138(1), 86–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspi.2007.05.021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krige, D. G. (1951). A statistical approach to some basic mine valuation problems on the witwatersrand. Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 52(6), 119–139.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, S.-J., & Wentz, E. A. (2008). Applying bayesian maximum entropy to extrapolating local- scale water consumption in maricopa county, arizona. Water Resources Research, 44(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1029/2007WR006101
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, H., Deng, X., Dolloff, C., & Smith, E. (2016). Bivariate functional data clustering: Grouping streams based on a varying coefficient model of the stream water and air temperature relationship. Environmetrics, 27(1), 15–26. https://doi.org/10.1002/env.2370
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marrel, A., Iooss, B., Da Veiga, S., & Ribatet, M. (2012). Global sensitivity analysis of stochastic computer models with joint metamodels. Statistics and Computing, 22(3), 833–847. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11222-011-9274-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mason, W., & Suri, S. (2018). On the predictive validity of various corpus-based frequency norms in L2 English lexical processing. Behavior Research Methods, 50(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-017-1001-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mason, W., & Watts, D. J. (2012). Collaborative learning in networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(3), 764–769. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1110069108
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Papadelis, S., & Flamos, A. (2019). An application of calibration and uncertainty quantification techniques for agent-based models. Understanding Risks and Uncertainties in Energy and Climate Policy, 79. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03152-7_3
   Google Scholar
• Pearl, J., & Mackenzie, D. (2018). The book of why: The new science of cause and effect. Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Ren, Y., Cedeno-Mieles, V., Hu, Z., Deng, X., Adiga, A., Barrett, C. & Macy, M. W. (2018). Generative modeling of human behavior and social interactions using abductive analysis. In 2018 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM), Barcelona, Spain (pp. 413–420).
   Google Scholar
• Ryzhov, I. O., Zhang, Q., & Chen, Y. (2020). Advanced statistical methods: Inference, variable selection, and experimental design. In 2020 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC) (pp. 1–15).
   Google Scholar
• Sanchez, A. (2022). Group identity and charitable contributions: Experimental evidence. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 194, 542–549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2021.12.032
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sevcikova, H., Raftery, A. E., & Waddell, P. A. (2007). Assessing uncertainty in urban simulations using bayesian melding. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 41(6), 652–669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2006.11.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheikholeslami, R., & Razavi, S. (2017). Progressive latin hypercube sampling: An efficient approach for robust sampling-based analysis of environmental models. Environmental Modelling & Software, 93, 109–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2017.03.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sweeting, T. J. (1980). Uniform asymptotic normality of the maximum likelihood estimator. The Annals of Statistics, 8(6), 1375–1381. https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176345208
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van de Schoot, R., Depaoli, S., King, R., Kramer, B., Märtens, K., Tadesse, M. G., & others. (2021). Bayesian statistics and modelling. Nature Reviews Methods Primers, 1(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43586-020-00001-2
   Google Scholar
• Watson, G. B. (1928). Do groups think more effectively than individuals? Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 23(3), 328–336. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0072661
   Google Scholar
• Wu, C. J., & Hamada, M. S. (2011). Experiments: Planning, analysis, and optimization (Vol. 552). John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar