The Annals of Regional Science

, Volume 57, Issue 2–3, pp 309–334 | Cite as

Exploring behavioral regions in agents’ mental maps

Special Issue Paper

Abstract

Agent-based models continue to grow more sophisticated at the individual scale of regional science inquiry, but it remains difficult to ally the intricacies of individual behavior in those models to regional phenomena and processes in anything but a loose fashion, leaving explanatory pathways between the scales quite slack. In this paper, we present a mechanism for bridging the gap between individual agency and regional outcomes of that agency in simulation. We use agents to develop very rich behavioral understanding of their surroundings in simulation. We then sweep through the information that agents generate when determining how to execute their transition rules, using schemes that mine agent states to produce mental maps of varied aspects of their dynamics. From agents’ mental maps, we define and visualize regions as geographies that are conjured from the unique, autonomous, local, and personal insight that agents can provide. We demonstrate the utility of the scheme, with application to indoor movement scenarios in which fleeting regions form amid agents interactions with each other and their built surroundings. Our approach is extensible beyond these applications and could be of broader use for other explorative scenarios in regional science.

JEL Classification

C63 D81 

References

  1. Arthur WB (1990) Positive feedbacks in the economy. Sci Am 262(2):80–85Google Scholar
  2. Badler NI, Bindiganavale R, Granieri JP, Wei S, Zhao Z (1994) Posture interpolation with collision avoidance. In: Anonymous (ed) Proceedings of computer animation’94, Geneva, May 25–28, Geneva: IEEE, pp 13–20Google Scholar
  3. Badler NI, Manoochehri KH, Walters G (1987) Articulated figure positioning by multiple constraints. Comput Graph Appl 7(6):28–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Batty M (2003) Agent-based pedestrian modelling. In: Longley PA, Batty M (eds) Advanced spatial analysis: the CASA book of GIS. ESRI Press, Redlands, pp 81–107Google Scholar
  5. Batty M (2005) Cities and complexity: understanding cities with cellular automata, agent-based models, and fractals. The MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  6. Batty M (2006) Rank clocks. Nature 444(7119):592–596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Batty M (2008) Fifty years of urban modeling: macro-statics to micro-dynamics. In: Albeverio S, Andrey D, Giordano P, Vancheri A (eds) The dynamics of complex urban systems. Physica-Verlag HD, Berlin, pp 1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Batty M, Longley PA, Fotheringham AS (1989) Urban growth and form: scaling, fractal geometry, and diffusion-limited-aggregation. Environ Plan A 21:1447–1472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Batty M, Torrens PM (2005) Modeling and prediction in a complex world. Futures 37(7):745–766CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Batty M, Xie Y, Zhao K (2007) Simulating emergent urban form using agent-based modeling: Desakota in the Suzhou-Wuxian region in China. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 97(3):477–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Benenson I, Omer I, Hatna E (2002) Entity-based modeling of urban residential dynamics: the case of Yaffo, Tel Aviv. Environ Plan B Plan Des 29:491–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Benenson I, Torrens PM (2004) Geosimulation: automata-based modeling of urban phenomena. Wiley, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Boltes M, Seyfried A, Steffen B, Schadschneider A (2010) Automatic extraction of pedestrian trajectories from video recordings. In: Klingsch WWF, Rogsch C, Schadschneider A, Schreckenberg M (eds) Pedestrian and evacuation dynamics 2008. Springer, Berlin, pp 43–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Boyce DE (1988) Renaissance of large-scale models. Pap Reg Sci 65(1):1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Brown DG, Robinson DT (2006) Effects of heterogeneity in residential preferences on an agent-based model of urban sprawl. Ecol Soc 11(1):46–68Google Scholar
  16. Bukowski RW, Kuligowski ED (2004) Basis for Egress Provisions in US Building Codes. In: Interflam (ed) Tenth proceedings of international interflam conference, Edinburgh, Scotland, 5–7 July 2004, Greenwich, UK: Interscience Communications, pp 375–386Google Scholar
  17. Chen J, Shaw S-L, Yu H, Lu F, Chai Y, Jia Q (2011) Exploratory data analysis of activity diary data: a space-time GIS approach. J Transp Geogr 19(3):394–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Clark WA (1991) Residential preferences and neighborhood racial segregation: a test of the Schelling segregation model. Demography 28(1):1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Clark WAV (1993) Search and choice in urban housing markets. In: Gärling T, Golledge RG (eds) Behavior and environment: psychological and geographical approaches. Elsevier, North Holland, Amsterdam, pp 298–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Daamen W, Hoogendoorn S (2003) Controlled experiments to derive walking behaviour. Eur J Transp Infrastruct Res 3(1):39–59Google Scholar
  21. Daamen W, Hoogendoorn SP (2004) Pedestrian traffic flow operations on a platform: observations and comparison with simulation tool SimPed. In: Allen J, Brebbia CA, Hill RJ, Sciutto G, Sone S (eds) Computers in railways IX (Congress proceedings of CompRail 2004), Dresden, Germany, May 2004. WIT Press, Southampton, pp 125–134Google Scholar
  22. Edelsbrunner H (1992) Weighted alpha shapes (unpublished paper, Department of Computer Science, Duke University). Duke University, Durham, NCGoogle Scholar
  23. Edelsbrunner H, Kirkpatrick D, Seidel R (1983) On the shape of a set of points in the plane. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 29(4):551–559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Edelsbrunner H, Mücke EP (1994) Three-dimensional alpha shapes. ACM Trans Graph 13(1):43–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ericson C (2005) Real-time collision detection. Morgan Kauffman, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  26. Gibson W (1984) Neuromancer. Ace Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  27. Goffmann E (1963) Behavior in public places. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. Goffmann E (1971) Relations in public: microstudies in the public order. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Golledge R, Stimson RJ (1997) Spatial behavior: a geographic perspective. The Guilford Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. Golledge RA (1992) Place recognition and wayfinding: making sense of space. Geoforum 23(2):199–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Golledge R (1999) Wayfinding behavior: cognitive mapping and other spatial processes. The Johns Hopkins Press, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  32. Golledge RG (1981) Misconceptions, misinterpretations, and misrepresentations of behavioral approaches in human geography. Environ Plan A 13(11):1325–1344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gould P, White R (1974) Mental maps. Routledge, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hägerstrand T (1970) What about people in regional science? Pap Reg Sci 24(1):6–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hägerstrand T (1982) Diorama, path and project. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie 73:323–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Helbing D, Molnár P (1997) Self-organization phenomena in pedestrian crowds. In: Schweitzer F (ed) Self-organization of complex structures: from individual to collective dynamics. Gordon and Breach, London, pp 569–577Google Scholar
  37. Klosterman RE (1994) Large-scale urban models: retrospect and prospect. J Am Plan Assoc 60(1):3–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Landis J (2001) CUF, CUF II, and CURBA: a family of spatially explicit urban growth and land-use policy simulation models. In: Brail RK, Klosterman RE (eds) Planning support systems: integrating geographic information systems, models, and visualization tools. ESRI Press, Redlands, CA, pp 157–200Google Scholar
  39. Latombe J-C (1991) Robot motion planning. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MACrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mansury Y, Gulyas L (2007) The emergence of Zipf’s Law in a system of cities: an agent-based simulation approach. J Econ Dyn Contr 31(7):2438–2460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Mount DM, Silverman R (1990) Packing and covering the plane with translates of a convex polygon. J Algorithm 11(4):564–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Nagel K, Schrekenberg M (1995) Traffic jams in stochastic cellular automata. Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los AlamosGoogle Scholar
  43. Nara A, Torrens PM (2007) Spatial and temporal analysis of pedestrian egress behavior and efficiency. In: Samet H, Shahabi C, Schneider M (eds) Association of computing machinery (ACM) advances in geographic information systems. Association of Computing Machinery, New York, pp 284–287Google Scholar
  44. Nara A, Torrens PM (2011) Trajectory data mining: classification and spatio-temporal visualization of mobile objects. In: Cheng T, Longley PA, Ellul C, Chow A (eds) Proceedings of geocomputation 2011, July 20–22, London. Geocomputation, London, pp 338–345Google Scholar
  45. Okabe A, Boots BN, Sugihara K, Chiu SN (1992) Spatial tessellations: concepts and applications of voronoi diagrams. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  46. Reynolds CW (1987) Flocks, herds, and schools: a distributed behavioral model. Comput Graph 21(4):25–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Reynolds CW (1999) Steering behaviors for autonomous characters. In: Proceedings of game developers conference. Miller Freeman Game Group, San Francisco, pp 763–782Google Scholar
  48. Rollero C, De Piccoli N (2010) Place attachment, identification and environment perception: an empirical study. J Environ Psychol 30(2):198–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Schweitzer F (2002) Modeling migration and economic agglomeration with active Brownian particles. In: Schweitzer F (ed) Modeling complexity in economic and social systems. World Scientific Publishing Company, Singapore, pp 137–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sipper M (1997) Evolution of parallel cellular machines: the cellular programming approach. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Slater-Hammel A (1955) Estimation of movement as a function of the distance of movement perception and target distance. Percept Mot Skills 5(3):201–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Smith JH (1882) Exit from theaters. Google Patents, USAGoogle Scholar
  53. Stanley HE (2000) Non-equilibrium physics: freezing by heating. Nature 404(6779):718–719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sumpter DJT (2006) The principles of collective animal behaviour. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 29(361):5–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Takeyama M, Couclelis H (1997) Map dynamics: integrating cellular automata and GIS through geo-algebra. Int J Geogr Inf Syst 11(1):73–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Tolani D, Goswami A, Badler NI (2000) Real-time inverse kinematics techniques for anthropomorphic limbs. Graph Model 62:353–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Tomlin CD (1990) Geographic information systems and cartographic modeling. Prentice Hall College Divison, Englewood-CliffsGoogle Scholar
  58. Tomlinson RF (1974) The application of electronic computing methods to the storage, compilation and assessment of mapped data. In: Unpublished Ph. D. thesis. London: Department of Geography, University of London, University College LondonGoogle Scholar
  59. Torrens PM (2001) Where in the world? Exploring the factors driving place location knowledge among secondary level students in Dublin, Ireland. J Geogr 100(2):49–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Torrens PM (2007a) Behavioral intelligence for geospatial agents in urban environments. In: Lin TY, Bradshaw JM, Klusch M, Zhang C (eds) IEEE intelligent agent technology (IAT 2007). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, pp 63–66Google Scholar
  61. Torrens PM (2007b) A geographic automata model of residential mobility. Environ Plan B 33(2):200–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Torrens PM (2010a) Agent-based modeling and the spatial sciences. Geogr Compass 4(5):428–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Torrens PM (2010b) Geography and computational social science. Geo J 75(2):133–148Google Scholar
  64. Torrens PM (2012) Moving agent pedestrians through space and time. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 102(1):35–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Torrens PM (2014) High-fidelity behaviours for model people on model streetscapes. Ann GIS 20(3):139–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Torrens PM (2015a) Geographical agents in three dimensions. In: Singleton A, Brunsdon C (eds) Geocomput Prac Prim. Sage, London, pp 40–62Google Scholar
  67. Torrens PM (2015b) Slipstreaming human geosimulation in virtual geographic environments. Annals of GIS (Online first at http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/19475683.2015.1009489):1-20
  68. Torrens PM, Griffin WA (2013) Exploring the micro-social geography of children’s interactions in preschool: a long-term observational study and analysis using Geographic Information Technologies. Environ Behav 45(5):584–614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Torrens PM, Li X, Griffin WA (2011) Building agent-based walking models by machine-learning on diverse databases of space-time trajectory samples. Trans Geogr Inf Sci 15(s1):67–94Google Scholar
  70. Torrens PM, Nara A (2007) Modeling gentrification dynamics: a hybrid approach. Comput Environ Urban Syst 31(3):337–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Torrens PM, Nara A (2013) Polyspatial agents for multi-scale urban simulation and regional policy analysis. Reg Sci Policy Pract 44(4):419–445Google Scholar
  72. Torrens PM, Nara A, Li X, Zhu H, Griffin WA, Brown SB (2012) An extensible simulation environment and movement metrics for testing walking behavior in agent-based models. Comput Environ Urban Syst 36(1):1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Tuan Y-F (1975a) Images and mental maps. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 65(2):205–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Tuan Y-F (1975b) Place: an experiential perspective. Geogra Rev 65(2):151–165Google Scholar
  75. van de Panne M (1997) From footprints to animation. Comput Graph Forum 16(4):211–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Waddell PA, Borning A, Noth M, Freier N, Becke M, Ulfarsson G (2003) Microsimulation of urban development and location choices: design and implementation of UrbanSim. Netw Spat Econ 3(1):43–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Zhao J, Badler NI (1994) Inverse kinematics positioning using nonlinear programming for highly articulated figures. ACM Trans Graph 13(4):313–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Geosimulation Research Laboratory, Department of Geographical Sciences, Center for Geospatial Information Science, Institute for Advanced Computer Studies (UMIACS)University of MarylandCollege ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations