Abstract
Agent-based computational simulation models can be complex and this can make it difficult to understand which processes are driving model behaviour. Sensitivity analysis by means of metamodels can greatly facilitate the understanding of the behaviour of complex simulation models. However, this method has so far largely been neglected in agent-based computational demography, with few exceptions. In this chapter, I illustrate how sensitivity analysis can be conducted by means of regression metamodels. I argue that this type of metamodel is particularly attractive for use in agent-based computational demography due to the fact that most demographers have at least a basic understanding of multiple regression. This makes this type of metamodel highly accessible and easy to communicate. After describing the basics of regression metamodels, I illustrate their use by conducting a sensitivity analysis of an agent-based model of educational assortative mating that is based on data on the structure of Belgian marriage markets between 1921 and 2012. I close the chapter with a discussion of the benefits and limitations of regression metamodels and point the reader to further readings on this topic.
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
For a discussion of additional popular designs see the chapter by Hilton and Bijak in this volume.
- 2.
Eurostat, European Commission and the national statistical offices collecting the data have no responsibility for the results and conclusions which were drawn in this paper on the basis of the European Community Household Panel data.
- 3.
I thank an anonymous reviewer for pointing this out.
- 4.
I thank an anonymous reviewer for pointing this out.
References
Antony, J. (2003). Design of experiments for engineers and scientists. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinmann.
Bijak, J., Hilton, J., Silverman, E., & Cao, V. D. (2013). Reforging the wedding ring: Exploring a semi-artificial model of population for the United Kingdom with Gaussian process emulators. Demographic Research, 29, 729–766.
Billari, F. C., Ongaro, F., & Prskawetz, A. (2003). Introduction: Agent-based computational demography. In F. C. Billari & A. Prskawetz (Eds.), Agent-based computational demography: Using simulation to improve our understanding of demographic behaviour (pp. 1–17). Heidelberg: Physica Verlag.
Billari, F. C., Prskawetz, A., Aparicio Diaz, B., & Fent, T. (2007). The “Wedding-Ring”: An agent-based marriage model based on social interaction. Demographic Research, 17, 59–82.
Bonabeau, E. (2002). Agent-based modeling: Methods and techniques for simulating human systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 99(Suppl. 3), 7280–7287.
Coutts, S. R., & Yokomizo, H. (2014). Meta-models as a straightforward approach to the sensitivity analysis of complex models. Population Ecology, 56(1), 7–19.
De Hauw, Y., Grow, A., Van Bavel, J. (2015). The shifting gender balance in higher education and assortative mating in Europe. Paper presented at the 2015 Annual Meeting of the Population Association of America, San Diego, USA.
De Mulder, W., Grow, A., Molenberghs, G., & Verbeke, G. (2015). Application of statistical emulation to an agent-based model: Assortative mating and the reversal of gender inequality in education in Belgium. In H. Friedl & H. Wagner (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th international workshop on statistical modelling, vol. 1 (pp. 139–144). Linz.
England, P., & McClintock, E. A. (2009). The gendered double standard of aging in US marriage markets. Population and Development Review, 35(4), 797–816.
Epstein, J. M. (1999). Agent-based computational models and generative social science. Complexity, 4(5), 41–60.
Esteve, A., García-Román, J., & Permanyer, I. (2012). The gender-gap reversal in education and its effect on union formation: The end of hypergamy? Population and Development Review, 38(3), 535–546.
Fox, J. (2008). Applied regression analysis and generalized linear models (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Grow, A., & Van Bavel, J. (2015). Assortative mating and the reversal of gender inequality in education in Europe: An agent-based model. PLoS ONE, 10(6), e0127806.
Kalmijn, M. (1994). Assortative mating by cultural and economic occupational status. American Journal of Sociology, 100(2), 422–452.
KC, S., Barakat, B., Goujon, A., Skirbekk, V., Sanderson, W. C., & Lutz, W. (2010). Projection of populations by level of educational attainment, age, and sex for 120 countries for 2005–2050. Demographic Research, 22, 383–472.
Kleijnen, J. P. C. (1992). Sensitivity analysis of simulation experiments: Regression analysis and statistical design. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 34(3–4), 297–315.
Kleijnen, J. P. C. (2005). An overview of the design and analysis of simulation experiments for sensitivity analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 164(2), 287–300.
Kleijnen, J. P. C. (2008). Design and analysis of simulation experiments. Tilburg: Springer.
Kleijnen, J. P. C., & Sargent, R. G. (2000). A methodology for fitting and validating metamodels in simulation. European Journal of Operational Research, 120(1), 14–29.
Kleijnen, J. P. C., van Ham, G., & Rotmans, J. (1992). Techniques for sensitivity analysis of simulation models: A case study of the CO2 greenhouse effect. Simulation, 58(6), 410–417.
Kleijnen, J. P. C., Sanchez, S. M., Lucas, T. W., & Cioppa, T. M. (2005). A user’s guide to the brave new world of designing simulation experiments. INFORMS Journal on Computing, 17(3), 263–289.
Law, A. M., & Kelton, D. W. (2000). Simulation modeling and analysis (3rd ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Lenth, R. V. (2009). Response-surface methods in R, using rsm. Journal of Statistical Software, 32(7), 1–17.
Ligmann-Zielinska, A., Kramer, D. B., Cheruvelil, K. S., & Soranno, P. A. (2014). Using uncertainty and sensitivity analysis in sociological agent-based models to improve their analytical performance and policy relevance. PLoS ONE, 9(10), e109779.
Lorscheid, I., Heine, B.-O., & Meyer, M. (2012). Opening the “Black Box” of simulations: Increased transparency and effective communication through the systematic design of experiments. Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, 18(1), 22–62.
Lutz, W., Goujon, A., KC, S., & Sanderson, W. C. (2007). Reconstruction of populations by age, sex and level of educational attainment for 120 countries for 1970–2000. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 5, 193–235.
Macy, M. W., & Flache, A. (2009). Social dynamics from the bottom up: Agent-based models of social interaction. In P. Hedström & P. Bearman (Eds.), The oxford handbook of analytical sociology (pp. 245–268). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Macy, M. W., & Willer, R. (2002). From factors to actors: Computational sociology and agent-based modeling. Annual Review of Sociology, 28, 143–166.
McCarthy, M. A., Burgman, M. A., & Ferson, S. (1995). Sensitivity analysis for models of population viability. Biological Conservation, 73(2), 93–100.
Myers, R. H., & Montgomery, D. C. (1995). Response surface methodology: Process and product optimization using designed experiments. New York: Wiley.
Oakley, J., & O’Hagan, A. (2002). Bayesian inference for the uncertainty distribution of computer model outputs. Biometrika, 89(4), 769–784.
Oppenheimer, V. K. (1988). A theory of marriage timing. American Journal of Sociology, 94(3), 563–591.
R Core Team. (2014). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
Rao, C. R. (1959). Some problems involving linear hypothesis in multivariate analysis. Biometrika, 46(1/2), 49–58.
Schelling, T. C. (1971). Dynamic models of segregation. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 1(2), 143–186.
Schwartz, C. R. (2013). Trends and variation in assortative mating: Causes and consequences. Annual Review of Sociology, 39, 451–470.
Silverman, E., Bijak, J., Hilton, J., Cao, V. D., & Noble, J. (2013). When demography met social simulation: A tale of two modelling approaches. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 16(4), 9.
Simão, J., & Todd, P. M. (2002). Modeling mate choice in monogamous mating systems with courtship. Adaptive Behavior, 10(2), 113–136.
Simpson, T. W., Peplinski, J. D., Koch, P. N., & Allen, J. K. (2001). Metamodels for computer-based engineering design: Survey and recommendations. Engineering with Computers, 17(2), 129–150.
Smaldino, P. E., & Schank, J. C. (2011). Human mate choice is a complex system. Complexity, 17(5), 11–22.
Thiele, J. C., Kurth, W., & Grimm, V. (2014). Facilitating parameter estimation and sensitivity analysis of agent-based models: A cookbook using NetLogo and R. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 17(3), 11.
Todd, P. M., Hills, T., & Hendrickson, A. (2013). Modeling reproductive decisions with simple heuristics. Demographic Research, 29, 641–662.
Tunali, S., & Batzman, I. (2000). Dealing with the least squares regression assumptions in simulation metamodeling. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 38(2), 307–320.
Van Bavel, J. (2012). The reversal of gender inequality in education, union formation and fertility in Europe. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 10, 127–154.
Acknowledgments
The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Research Council under the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP/2007–2013)/ERC Grant Agreement no. 312290 for the GENDERBALL project. I thank Jan Van Bavel, Hideko Matsuo, and two anonymous reviewers for helpful comments on earlier versions of this chapter.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
1 Electronic Supplementary Material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Grow, A. (2017). Regression Metamodels for Sensitivity Analysis in Agent-Based Computational Demography. In: Grow, A., Van Bavel, J. (eds) Agent-Based Modelling in Population Studies. The Springer Series on Demographic Methods and Population Analysis, vol 41. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32283-4_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32283-4_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-32281-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-32283-4
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)