Category: Vensim

A Dynamic Synthesis of Basic Macroeconomic Theory

Model Name: A Dynamic Synthesis of Basic Macroeconomic Theory

Citation: Forrester, N.B. (1982) A Dynamic Synthesis of Basic Macroeconomic Theory: Implications for Stabilization Policy Analysis. PhD Dissertation, MIT Sloan School of Management.

Source: Provided by Nathan Forrester

Units balance: Yes, with 3 exceptions, evidently from the original publication

Format: Vensim

Notes: I mention this model in this article

A Dynamic Synthesis of Basic Macroeconomic Theory (Vensim .vpm)

Update: a newer version with improved diagrams and a control panel, plus changes files for a series of experiments with responses to negative demand shocks:

Download NFDis+TF-3.vpm or NFDis+TF-3.zip

The model runs in Vensim PLE, but you’ll need an advanced version to use the .cin and .cmd files included.

A note on the bathtub analogy

Adapted from “A note on the bathtub analogy,” Pål Davidsen, Erling Moxnes, Mauricio Munera Sánchez, David Wheat, 2011 System Dynamics Conference.

Abstract

The bathtub analogy has been used extensively to illustrate stock and flow relationships. Because this analogy is frequently used, System Dynamicists should be aware that the natural outflow of water from a bathtub is a nonlinear function of water volume. A questionnaire suggests that students with one year or more of System Dynamics training tend to assume a linear relationship when asked to model a water outflow driven by gravity. We present Torricelli’s law for the outflow and investigate the error caused by assuming linearity. We also construct an “inverted funnel” which does behave like a linear system. We conclude by pointing out that the nonlinearity is of no importance for the usefulness of bathtubs or funnels as analogies. On the other hand, simplified analogies could make modellers overconfident in linear formulations and not able to address critical remarks from physicists or other specialists.

See my related blog post for details.

Units balance.

Runs in Vensim (any version): ToricelliBathtub.mdl ToricelliBathtub.vpm

The Economic Long Wave

This is John Sterman’s model of long waves (long-duration economic cycles), driven by capital accumulation dynamics. This version is replicated from a JEBO article,

STERMAN, J. D. (1985) A Behavioral Model of the Economic Long Wave. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 6, 17-53.

There’s some interesting related literature (including other economic models in this library). From Sterman’s publications list:

STERMAN, J. D. & MOSEKILDE, E. (1994) Business Cycles and Long Waves: A Behavioral, Disequilibrium Perspective. IN SEMMLER, W. (Ed.) Business Cycles: Theory and Empirical Methods. Boston, Kluwer Academic Publishers.

STERMAN, J. D. (1994) The Economic Long Wave: Theory and Evidence. IN SHIMADA, T. (Ed.) An Introduction to System Dynamics. Tokyo.

STERMAN, J. D. (2002) A Behavioral Model of the Economic Long Wave. IN EARL, P. E. (Ed.) The Legacy of Herbert Simon in Economic Analysis. Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar.

STERMAN, J. D. (1985) An Integrated Theory of the Economic Long Wave. Futures, 17, 104-131.

RASMUSSEN, S., MOSEKILDE, E. & STERMAN, J. D. (1985) Bifurcations and Chaotic Behavior in a Simple Model of the Economic Long Wave. System Dynamics Review, 1, 92-110.

STERMAN, J. D. (1983) The Long Wave. Science, 219, 1276.

KAMPMANN, C., HAXHOLDT, C., MOSEKILDE, E. & STERMAN, J. D. (1994) Entrainment in a Disaggregated Economic Long Wave Model. IN LEYDESDORFF, L. & VAN DEN BESSELAAR, P. (Eds.) Evolutionary Economics and Chaos Theory. London, Pinter.

MOSEKILDE, E., LARSEN, E. R., STERMAN, J. D. & THOMSEN, J. S. (1993) Mode Locking and Nonlinear Entrainment of Macroeconomic Cycles. IN DAY, R. & CHEN, P. (Eds.) Nonlinear Economics and Evolutionary Economics. New York, Oxford University Press.

MOSEKILDE, E., THOMSEN, J. S. & STERMAN, J. D. (1992) Nonlinear Interactions in the Economy. IN HAAG, G., MÜLLER, U. & TROITZSCH, K. (Eds.) Economic Evolution and Demographic Change. Berlin, Springer Verlag.

THOMSEN, J. S., MOSEKILDE, E. & STERMAN, J. D. (1991) Hyperchaotic Phenomena in Dynamic Decision Making. IN SINGH, M. G. & TRAVÉ-MASSUYÈS, L. (Eds.) Decision Support Systems and Qualitative Reasoning. Amsterdam, Elsevier Science Publishers.

THOMSEN, J. S., MOSEKILDE, E., LARSEN, E. R. & STERMAN, J. D. (1991) Mode-Locking and Chaos in a Periodically Driven Model of the Economic Long Wave. IN EBELING, W. (Ed.) Models of Self Organization in Complex Systems. Berlin, Akademie Verlag.

STERMAN, J. D. (1988) Nonlinear Dynamics in the World Economy: The Economic Long Wave. IN CHRISTIANSEN, P. & PARMENTIER, R. (Eds.) Structure, Coherence, and Chaos in Dynamical Systems. Manchester, Manchester University Press.

STERMAN, J. D. (1987) Debt, Default, and Long Waves: Is History Relevant? IN BOECKH, A. (Ed.) The Escalation in Debt and Disinflation: Prelude to Financial Mania and Crash? Montreal, BCA Publications.

STERMAN, J. D. (1987) An Integrated Theory of the Economic Long Wave. IN WANG, Q., SENGE, P., RICHARDSON, G. P. & MEADOWS, D. H. (Eds.) Theory and Application of System Dynamics. Beijing, New Times Press.

STERMAN, J. D. (1987) The Economic Long Wave: Theory and Evidence. IN VASKO, T. (Ed.) The Long Wave Debate. Berlin, Springer Verlag.

RASMUSSEN, S., MOSEKILDE, E. & STERMAN, J. D. (1987) Bifurcations and Chaotic Behavior in a Simple Model of the Economic Long Wave. IN WANG, Q., SENGE, P., RICHARDSON, G. P. & MEADOWS, D. H. (Eds.) Theory and Application of System Dynamics. Beijing, New Times Press.

And from Christian Kampmann,

“The Role of Prices in Long Wave Entrainment” (with C. Haxholdt, E. Mosekilde, and J.D. Sterman), International System Dynamics Conference, Stirling, U.K. and at the Spring 1994 ORSA/TIMS conference, Boston, MA. 1994.
“Disaggregating a simple model of the economic long wave” International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, Keystone, CO, 1985.
The long wave model was the guine pig for Kampmann’s interesting ’96 conference paper that combined a graph-theoretic identification of a set of feedback loops having independent gains with eigenvalue analysis,
Kampmann, Christian E.   Feedback Loop Gains and System Behavior
There also used to be a nifty long wave game, programmed on NEC minicomputers (32k memory?), but I’ve lost track of it. I’d be interested to here of a working version.

Economic Cycles: Underlying Causes

Nathaniel Mass’ model of economic cycles, replicated from his 1975 book, Economic Cycles: An Analysis of Underlying Causes, which unfortunately seems to have disappeared from the Productivity Press site (though you can still find used copies).

I haven’t checked, but I’m guessing that the model is quite similar to that in his PhD thesis, which you can get from MIT libraries here. Here’s the abstract:


The models: mass2.mdl mass2.vpm

These don’t have units defined, unfortunately – I’d love to have a copy with units if you’re so inclined.

The Dynamics of Commodity Production Cycles

These classic models are from Dennis Meadows’ dissertation, the Dynamics of Commodity Production Cycles:

While times have changed, the dynamics described by these models are still widespread.

These versions should work in all recent Vensim versions:

DLMhogs2.vpm DLMhogs2.mdl

DLMgeneric2.vpm DLMgeneric2.mdl

 

Setting up Vensim compiled simulation on Windows

If you don’t use Vensim DSS, you’ll find this post rather boring and useless. If you do, prepare for heart-pounding acceleration of your big model runs:

  • Get Vensim DSS.
  • Get a C compiler. Most flavors of Microsoft compilers are compatible; MS Visual C++ 2010 Express is a good choice (and free). You could probably use gcc, but I’ve never set it up. I’ve heard reports of issues with 2005 and 2008 versions, so it may be worth your while to upgrade.
  • Install Vensim, if you haven’t already, being sure to check the Install external function and compiled simulation support box.
  • Launch the program and go to Tools>Options…>Startup and set the Compiled simulation path to C:Documents and SettingsAll UsersVensimcomp32 (WinXP) or C:UsersPublicVensimcomp32 (Vista/7).
    • Check your mdl.bat in the location above to be sure that it points to the right compiler. This is a simple matter of checking to be sure that all options are commented out with “REM ” statements, except the one you’re using, for example:
  • Move to the Advanced tab and set the compilation options to Query or Compile (you may want to skip this for normal Simulation, and just do it for Optimization and Sensitivity, where speed really counts).

This is well worth the hassle if you’re working with a large model in SyntheSim or doing a lot of simulations for sensitivity analysis and optimization. The speedup is typically 4-5x.

Elk, wolves and dynamic system visualization

Bret Victor’s video of a slick iPad app for interactive visualization of the Lotka-Voltera equations has been making the rounds:

Coincidentally, this came to my notice around the same time that I got interested in the debate over wolf reintroduction here in Montana. Even simple models say interesting things about wolf-elk dynamics, which I’ll write about some other time (I need to get vaccinated for rabies first).

To ponder the implications of the video and predator-prey dynamics, I built a version of the Lotka-Voltera model in Vensim.

After a second look at the video, I still think it’s excellent. Victor’s two design principles, ubiquitous visualization and in-context manipulation, are powerful for communicating a model. Some aspects of what’s shown have been in Vensim since the introduction of SyntheSim a few years ago, though with less Tufte/iPad sexiness. But other features, like Causal Tracing, are not so easily discovered – they’re effective for pros, but not new users. The way controls appear at one’s fingertips in the iPad app is very elegant. The “sweep” mode is also clever, so I implemented a similar approach (randomized initial conditions across an array dimension) in my version of the model. My favorite trick, though, is the 2D control of initial conditions via the phase diagram, which makes discovery of the system’s equilibrium easy.

The slickness of the video has led some to wonder whether existing SD tools are dinosaurs. From a design standpoint, I’d agree in some respects, but I think SD has also developed many practices – only partially embodied in tools – that address learning gaps that aren’t directly tackled by the app in the video: Continue reading “Elk, wolves and dynamic system visualization”

Lotka-Volterra predator-prey system

The Lotka-Volterra equations, which describe a predator-prey system, must be one of the more famous dynamic systems. There are many generalizations and applications outside of biology.

Wikipedia has a nice article, which I used as the basis for this simple model.

Continue reading “Lotka-Volterra predator-prey system”

Path Dependence, Competition, and Succession in the Dynamics of Scientific Revolution

This is a very interesting model, both because it tackles ‘soft’ dynamics of paradigm formation in ‘hard’ science, and because it is an aggregate approach to an agent problem. Unfortunately, until now, the model was only available in DYNAMO, which limited access severely. It turns out to be fairly easy to translate to Vensim using the dyn2ven utility, once you know how to map the DYNAMO array FOR loops to Vensim subscripts.

Path Dependence, Competition, and Succession in the Dynamics of Scientific Revolution

J. Wittenberg and J. D. Sterman, 1999

Abstract

What is the relative importance of structural versus contextual forces in the birth and death of scientific theories? We describe a dynamic model of the birth, evolution, and death of scientific paradigms based on Kuhn’s Structure of Scientific Revolutions. The model creates a simulated ecology of interacting paradigms in which the creation of new theories is stochastic and endogenous. The model captures the sociological dynamics of paradigms as they compete against one another for members. Puzzle solving and anomaly recognition are also endogenous. We specify various regression models to examine the role of intrinsic versus contextual factors in determining paradigm success. We find that situational factors attending the birth of a paradigm largely determine its probability of rising to dominance, while the intrinsic explanatory power of a paradigm is only weakly related to the likelihood of success. For those paradigms that do survive the emergence phase, greater explanatory power is significantly related to longevity. However, the relationship between a paradigm’s ‘strength’ and the duration of normal science is also contingent on the competitive environment during the emergence phase. Analysis of the model shows the dynamics of competition and succession among paradigms to be conditioned by many positive feedback loops. These self-reinforcing processes amplify intrinsically unobservable micro-level perturbations in the environment – the local conditions of science, society, and self faced by the creators of a new theory – until they reach macroscopic significance. Such dynamics are the hallmark of self-organizing evolutionary systems.

We consider the implications of these results for the rise and fall of new ideas in contexts outside the natural sciences such as management fads.

Cite as: J. Wittenberg and J. D. Sterman (1999) Path Dependence, Competition, and Succession in the Dynamics of Scientific Revolution. Organization Science, 10.

I believe that this version is faithful to the original, but it’s difficult to be sure because the model is stochastic, so the results differ due to differences in the random number streams. For the moment, this model should be regarded as a beta release.

Continue reading “Path Dependence, Competition, and Succession in the Dynamics of Scientific Revolution”

Polya urn with increasing returns

This set of models performs a variant of a Polya urn experiment, along the lines of that described in Bryan Arthur’s Increasing Returns and Path Dependence in the Economy, Chapter 10. There’s a small difference, which is that samples are drawn with replacement (Bernoulli distribution) rather than without (hypergeometric distribution).

The interesting dynamics arise from competing positive feedback loops through the stocks of red and white balls. There’s useful related reading at http://tuvalu.santafe.edu/~wbarthur/Papers/Papers.html

I did the physical version of this experiment with Legos with my kids:

I tried the Polya urns experiment over lunch. We put 5 red and 5 white legos in a bowl, then took turns drawing a sample of 5. We returned the sample to the bowl, plus one lego of whichever color dominated the sample. Iterate. At the start, and after 2 or 3 rounds, I solicited guesses about what would happen. Gratifyingly, the consensus was that the bowl would remain roughly evenly divided between red and white. After a few more rounds, the reality began to diverge, and we stopped when white had a solid 2:1 advantage. I wondered aloud whether using a larger or smaller sample would lead to faster convergence. With no consensus about the answer, we tried it – drawing samples of just 1 lego. I think the experimental outcome was somewhat inconclusive – we quickly reached dominance of red, but the sampling process was much faster, so it may have actually taken more rounds to achieve that. There’s a lot of variation possible in the outcome, which means that superstitious learning is a possible trap.

This model automates the experiment, which makes it easier and more reliable to explore questions like the sensitivity of the rate of divergence to the sample size.

PolyaUrn.vpm

This version works with Vensim PLE (though it’s not supposed to, because it uses the RANDOM BERNOULLI function). It performs a single experiment per run, but includes sensitivity control files for performing hundreds of runs at a time (requires PLE Plus). That makes for a nice map of outcomes:

Continue reading “Polya urn with increasing returns”