In this paper, we propose a sentiment-based approach to investigate the temporal and spatiotemporal effects on tourists’ emotions when visiting a city’s tourist destinations. Our approach consists of four steps: data collection and preprocessing from social media; visitor origin identification; visit sentiment identification; and temporal and spatiotemporal analysis. The temporal and spatiotemporal dimensions include day of the year, season of the year, day of the week, location sentiment progression, enjoyment measure, and multi-location sentiment progression. We apply this approach to the city of Chicago using over eight million tweets. Results show that seasonal weather, as well as special days and activities like concerts, impact tourists’ emotions. In addition, our analysis suggests that tourists experience greater levels of enjoyment in places such as observatories rather than zoos. Finally, we find that local and international visitors tend to convey negative sentiment when visiting more than one attraction in a day whereas the opposite holds for out of state visitors.

Validation is the process of determining if a model adequately represents the system under study for the model's intended purpose. Validation is a critical component in building the credibility of a simulation model with its end-users. Effectively conducting validation can be a daunting task for both novice and experienced simulation developers. Further compounding the difficult task of conducting validation is that there is no universally accepted approach for assessing a simulation. These challenges are particularly relevant to the paradigm of Agent-Based Modeling and Simulation (ABMS) because of the complexity found in these models' mechanisms and in the real-world situations they attempt to represent. To aid both the novice and expert in conducting a validation process for an agent-based simulation, this article reviews nine methods that are useful for this process, including foundational topics of docking, empirical validation, sampling, and visualization, as well as advanced topics of bootstrapping, causal analysis, inverse generative social science, and role-playing. Each method is reviewed with respect to its benefits and limitations as a validation-supporting method for ABMS. Suggestions that may support a validation plan for an agent-based simulations, are also provided. This article is an introductory guide for understanding and conducting ABMS validation for developers of all experience levels.

Computational models and simulations often involve representations of decision-making processes. Numerous methods exist for representing decision-making at varied resolution levels based on the objectives of the simulation and the desired level of fidelity for validation. Decision making relies on the type of decision and the criteria that is appropriate for making the decision; therefore, decision makers can reach unique decisions that meet their own needs given the same information. Accounting for personalized weighting scales can help to reflect a more realistic state for a modeled system. To this end, this article reviews and summarizes eight multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) techniques that serve as options for reaching unique decisions based on personally and individually ranked criteria. These techniques are organized into a taxonomy of ratio assignment and approximate techniques, and the strengths and limitations of each are explored. We compare these techniques potential uses across the Agent-Based Modeling (ABM), System Dynamics (SD), and Discrete Event Simulation (DES) modeling paradigms to inform current researchers, students, and practitioners on the state-of-the-art and to enable new researchers to utilize methods for modeling multi-criteria decisions.

This article outlines the development – and reports on the experimental findings – of two computational models designed to simulate the dynamic systems and behavioural patterns identified and clarified by research on terror management theory. The causal architectures of these models are informed by empirical research on the effects of mortality salience on “religiosity” (and vice versa). They are also informed by research on the way in which perception of personal and environmental hazards activate evolved cognitive and coalitional precautionary systems that can intensify anxiety-alleviating behaviours such as imaginative engagement with supernatural agents postulated within a religious coalition. The capacity of the models to produce emergent patterns and behaviours that are similar to the results of other empirical studies supports the plausibility of their causal architectures. After tracing some of the literature that supports the causal dynamics of our models, we present the two models, describe the experiments, and report the results. We conclude by discussing the importance of the findings, the limitations of the models, and directions for future research.

We propose a generative agent-based model of the emergence and escalation of xenophobic anxiety in which individuals from two di erent religious groups encounter various hazards within an artificial society. The architecture of the model is informed by several empirically validated theories about the role of religion in intergroup conflict. Our results identify some of the conditions and mechanisms that engender the intensification of anxiety within and between religious groups. We define mutually escalating xenophobic anxiety as the increase of the average level of anxiety of the agents in both groups over time. Trace validation techniques show that the most common conditions under which longer periods of mutually escalating xenophobic anxiety occur are those in which the di erence in the size of the groups is not too large and the agents experience social and contagion hazards at a level of intensity that meets or exceeds their thresholds for those hazards. Under these conditions agents will encounter out-group members more regularly, and perceive them as threats, generating mutually escalating xenophobic anxiety. The model's capacity to grow the macro-level emergence of this phenomenon from micro-level agent behaviors and interactions provides the foundation for future work in this domain.

Large language models (LLMs) excel in providing natural language responses that sound authoritative, reflect knowledge of the context area, and can present from a range of varied perspectives. Agent-based models and simulations consist of simulated agents that interact within a simulated environment to explore societal, social, and ethical, among other, problems. Simulated agents generate large volumes of data and discerning useful and relevant content is an onerous task. LLMs can help in communicating agents’ perspectives on key life events by providing natural language narratives. However, these narratives should be factual, transparent, and reproducible. Therefore, we present a structured narrative prompt for sending queries to LLMs, we experiment with the narrative generation process using OpenAI’s ChatGPT, and we assess statistically significant differences across 11 Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) sentiment levels between the generated narratives and real tweets using chi-squared tests and Fisher’s exact tests. The narrative prompt structure effectively yields narratives with the desired components from ChatGPT. In four out of forty-four categories, ChatGPT generated narratives which have sentiment scores that were not discernibly different, in terms of statistical significance (alpha level $\alpha =0.05$), from the sentiment expressed in real tweets. Three outcomes are provided: (1) a list of benefits and challenges for LLMs in narrative generation; (2) a structured prompt for requesting narratives of an LLM chatbot based on simulated agents’ information; (3) an assessment of statistical significance in the sentiment prevalence of the generated narratives compared to real tweets. This indicates significant promise in the utilization of LLMs for helping to connect a simulated agent’s experiences with real people.