Talk:Comparison of agent-based modeling software

"In the last few years," how about we swap this out for something with actual meaning? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.115.39.40 (talk) 05:07, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Is this list too generic? I like this because it's the only article that seems to have a list of simulators for swarm robotics (my field) but it's mixed in with loosely related ones for social sciences or economics. Also some of the columns are not measuring the same thing, for instance I understand '3D capabilities' in the context of swarms to mean that agents are capable of moving in 3D space, yet on some of these they seem to define 3D as "there are 3D graphics in the viewer".Turtledaat (talk)

I'd also like to simplify some of these columns, some are way too verbose and seem to be written like an advertisement.Turtledaat (talk)

Should there be a section that retired projects? I noticed a couple smaller projects haven't been updated in > 1 year. Jackiekazil (talk) 03:35, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Actually that might be a good idea, but as long as there is a Wikipedia page about it. If a project does not have a Wikipedia page but is actively maintained and has a reasonable following then I'd also include it (which I've been doing).Turtledaat (talk) 21:40, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

What is this page ? It mixes everything, for example most common frameworks are missing and some other tools not related to agents (i.e. JESS) appear in the list. What did you wanted to do ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.214.107.61 (talk) 09:47, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

+1 - I was just thinking the same thing. Might be a good idea to add what each framework adds to the notion of "agent" - JESS for example can be used in an "agent" like any other rule engine, but I'm not sure it allows specific modelling of agents per se. 86.189.16.209 (talk) 08:01, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

The first two links here might perhaps be of interest, ----Erkan Yilmaz 11:35, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

MATLAB is not ABM modelling software - why have you included it? Richwil (talk) 14:30, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

AMP

Couldn't find AMP http://www.eclipse.org/amp/ --Daytonian Historian (talk) 04:13, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Comparison of agent-based modeling software. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070210033122/http://www.agentisolutions.com/index.htm to http://www.agentisolutions.com/index.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080723112830/http://omar.bbn.com/ to http://omar.bbn.com/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080808142015/http://www.santafe.edu/~pth/echo/ to http://www.santafe.edu/~pth/echo/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071209153838/http://web.econ.unito.it/terna/jes/ to http://web.econ.unito.it/terna/jes/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090413004538/http://www-ags.dfki.uni-sb.de/~kuf/magsy.html to http://www-ags.dfki.uni-sb.de/~kuf/magsy.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100715171446/http://mass.aitia.ai/ to http://mass.aitia.ai/
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://inf.ufrgs.br/massoc
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080305085054/http://www.cs.manchester.ac.uk/ai/public/moduleco/ to http://www.cs.manchester.ac.uk/ai/public/moduleco/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.xlog.ch/omonia/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100210154537/http://www.cise.ufl.edu/~fishwick/simpack.html to http://www.cise.ufl.edu/~fishwick/simpack.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080509133154/http://www.uvm.edu/giee/SME3/ to http://www.uvm.edu/giee/SME3/
• Added archive https://archive.is/20051028013836/http://labs.bt.com/projects/agents/zeus/ to http://labs.bt.com/projects/agents/zeus/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:47, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Criteria for inclusion

I recently added Mesa, an active and growing Python framework for doing ABM, and had my edit quickly reverted without comment.

What are the criteria for software that can be included here? --Jdfoote (talk) 20:56, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

I too think that software are arbitrarily included/excluded. I added Agents.jl, an active and well capable framework in Julia lang, and it is removed. Kavir1698 (talk) 19:34, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

This is a list of software that has a preexisting Wikipedia article. - MrOllie (talk) 20:46, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

If this is a community effort, then there should be some community agreement on what the inclusion criteria is. Does it actually make sense to eliminate the wide variety of tools people have developed, just because they have not (yet) reached notoriety? Wouldn't it be more informative to cast a wider net?

Also, the points of comparison are fairly thin. License will be important to some people, because they care about cost or re-usability. But the only two features listed are GIS and 3D. Of all the things an ABM system might do, it seem strange to call only these out. Why not have criteria like max number of agents, complexity of agents, types of interaction they are capable of, I/O processing, computer platforms that the tool can run on (desktop, supercomputer, cloud) and so on. Frothga (talk) 21:27, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

'has a preexisting Wikipedia article' is by far the most common (very nearly universal) inclusion criteria for lists of software and enjoys community-wide agreement from editors across the encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, though that is a common mistake. We don't want to cast a wider net than the encyclopedia's policies allow. - MrOllie (talk) 21:28, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Simulation and real software-agents are not the same

These two topics should be split in two articles. Geysirhead (talk) 07:10, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

done Geysirhead (talk) 08:24, 19 March 2023 (UTC)