Advertisement

The Empirical Microstructure of Agent-Based Models: Recent Trends in the Interplay between ACE and Experimental Economics

  • Paola D’OrazioEmail author
  • Marcello Silvestri
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 290)

Abstract

In this paper we discuss recent trends on the interplay between Experimental Economics and Agent-based Computational Economics (ACE). Experimental Economics proved useful in providing insights on human subjects’ decision-making as well as microeconomic data to estimate artificial agents. Agent-based Computations Economics allows for observing the aggregate outcome of artificial agents’ interactions and for replicating experiments at a larger scale.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Anufriev, M., Hommes, C., Makarewicz, T.: Learning to forecast with genetic algorithm. Tech. rep. (February 2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arifovic, J.: The behavior of the exchange rate in the genetic algorithm and experimental economies. Journal of Political Economy 104(3), 510–541 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Arthur, W.B.: Designing Economic Agents that Act like Human Agents: A Behavioral Approach to Bounded Rationality. American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings 81(2), 353–359 (1991)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Casari, M.: Markets in equilibrium with firms out of equilibrium: A simulation study. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 65(2), 261–276 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chen, S.H., Yu, T.: Agents learned, but do we? knowledge discovery using the agent-based double auction markets. Frontiers of Electrical and Electronic Engineering in China, 159–170 (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen, S.H., Zeng, R.J., Yu, T.: Co-evolving trading strategies to analyze bounded rationality in double auction markets. In: Genetic Programming, Theory and Practice VI, pp. 195–213. Springer (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chen, S.H.: Varieties of agents in agent-based computational economics: A historical and an interdisciplinary perspective. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 36(1), 1–25 (2012)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chen, S.H., Wang, S.G.: Emergent complexity in agent-based computational economics. Journal of Economic Surveys 25(3), 527–546 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Duffy, J.: Agent-based models and human subject experiments. In: Tesfatsion, L., Judd, K.L. (eds.) Handbook of Computational Economics, vol. 2, ch. 19, pp. 949–1011. Elsevier (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Farmer, J.D., Foley, D.: The economy needs agent-based modeling. Nature 460, 685–686 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gigerenzer, G., Hertwig, R., Pachur, T. (eds.): Heuristics: The Foundations of Adaptive Behavior. Oxford University Press, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Holland, J.H., Miller, J.H.: Artificial adaptive agents in economic theory. The American Economic Review 81, 365–370 (1991)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hommes, C.: The heterogeneous expectations hypothesis: Some evidence from the lab. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 35(1), 1–24 (2011)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hommes, C., Lux, T.: Individual expectations and aggregate behavior in learning-to-forecast experiments. Macroeconomic Dynamics 17, 373–401 (2013)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hommes, C.: Bounded rationality and learning in complex markets. CeNDEF Working Papers 07-01, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Center for Nonlinear Dynamics in Economics and Finance (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Keynes, J.M.: The general theory of employment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 51(2), 209–223 (1937)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kimbrough, E.O.: Heuristic learning and the discovery of specialization and exchange. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 35(4), 491–511 (2011)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kirman, A.P.: Whom or What Does The Representative Individual Represent. Journal of Economic Perspective 6, 117–136 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    LeBaron, B., Tesfatsion, L.: Modeling Macroeconomies as Open-Ended Dynamic Systems of Interacting Agents. American Economic Review 98(2), 246–250 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lucas, R.J.: Econometric policy evaluation: A critique. Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy 1(1), 19–46 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rouchier, J.: Data Gathering to Build and Validate Small Scale Social Models for Simulation. In: Rennard, J.P. (ed.) Handbook of Research on Nature Inspired Computing for Economics and Management, vol. 2, pp. 198–210. Idea Group (2007)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tesfatsion, L., Judd, K.: Handbook of Computational Economics. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2006)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Velupillai, K.V.: Towards an algorithmic revolution in economic theory. Journal of Economic Surveys 25(3), 401–430 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Vriend, N.: Artificial intelligence and economic thoery. In: Many-agent Simulation and Artificial Life (Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence & Applications), pp. 31–47 (1994)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Vriend, N.J.: An illustration of the essential difference between individual and social learning, and its consequences for computational analyses. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 24(1), 1–19 (2000)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Windrum, P., Fagiolo, G., Moneta, A.: Empirical validation of agent-based models: Alternatives and prospects. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 10(2) (2007)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zhao, X., Lin, W., Yu, C., Chen, J., Wang, S.: A new hybrid differential evolution with simulated annealing and self-adaptive immune operation. Computers & Mathematics with Applications 66(10), 1948–1960 (2013); iCNC-FSKD 2012 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Philosophical, Pedagogical and Economic-Quantitative Sciences“G. D’Annunzio” UniversityPescaraItaly
  2. 2.Research Group for Experimental Microfoundations of Macroeconomics (GEMM)PescaraItaly

Personalised recommendations