A role for goal-oriented autonomous agents in modeling people-environment interactions in forest recreation

Deadman, Peter; Gimblett, Randy

doi:10.1016/0895-7177(94)90236-4

Cited by 41 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In any given model, there also can be some spatial features that are not related to agents and some agents that are not related to spatial features. One example of an identity association is vehicles represented as agents, with movement rules, that are associated with points and attributes in a spatial database (Deadman and Gimblett 1994). The points move when the vehicles move and the attributes of the points change as the vehicles change (e.g., their fuel levels change).…”

Section: Relationships Affecting Process-data Couplingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial process and data models: Toward integration of agent-based models and GIS

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The use of object-orientation for both spatial data and spatial process models facilitates their integration, which can allow exploration and explanation of spatial-temporal phenomena. In order to better understand how tight coupling might proceed and to evaluate the possible functional and efficiency gains from such a tight coupling, we identify four key relationships affecting how geographic data (fields and objects) and agent-based process models can interact: identity, causal, temporal and topological. We discuss approaches to implementing tight integration, focusing on a middleware approach that links existing GIS and ABM development platforms, and illustrate the need and approaches with example agent-based models.Key words: Object-orientation, Agent-based models, Spatial-temporal modeling, Topology IntroductionThis paper addresses the representation of both form and process, as spatial data models and spatial process models, respectively, and how relationships between these representations might be structured to better facilitate scientific inquiry and application. Raper and Livingstone (1995)

show abstract

Section: Relationships Affecting Process-data Couplingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial process and data models: Toward integration of agent-based models and GIS

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These include use of field observations, selfregistration approaches, video cameras, GPS trackers, smartphones, social media derived information (e.g. twitter feeds) and thermal cameras (Deadman and Gimblett 1994;O'Connor et al 2005;Lau and McKercher 2006;Shoval and Isaacson 2007;Garthe 2010;Pettersson and Zillinger 2011;Birkin and Malleson 2012;Orellana et al 2012;Del Rosario et al 2015). Examples of the application of such methods include use of geo-spatial ankle transmitters on visitors to Twelve Apostles National Park in Victoria, Australia, to determine tourist behaviours (O'Connor et al 2005), and use of large GPS data sets to discover commonalties of visitor preferences in natural recreational areas (Orellana et al 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of methods for a landscape-scale assessment of the cultural ecosystem services associated with different habitats

Gosal

Newton

Gillingham

2018

International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Servic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cultural ecosystem services (CES) are widely acknowledged as important but are often neglected by ecosystem service assessments, leading to a representational bias. This reflects the methodological challenges associated with producing robust and repeatable CES valuations. Here we provide a comparative analysis of three approaches for non-monetary valuation of CES, namely a structured survey, participatory GIS (PGIS) and GPS tracking methods. These were used to assess both recreation and aesthetic value of habitats within the New Forest National Park, UK. The association of CES with habitats enabled results of all three methods to be visualised at the landscape scale using maps, strengthening their value to conservation management. Broadleaved woodland and heathland habitats were consistently valued highly for both CES, whereas agricultural land tended to be associated with low values. Results obtained by the different methods were positively correlated in 6 out of 10 comparisons, indicating a degree of consistency between them. The spatial distribution of CES values at the landscape scale was also generally consistent between the three methods. These results highlight the value of comparative analyses of CES for identifying robust results, providing a way forward for their inclusion in land management decision-making. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

“…ABM is particularly strong in dealing with heterogeneous actors in a context of multiple scales and levels, and hence a good candidate for systematic study of the complexity in environmental issues (Deadman and Gimblett, 1994;Balmann, 1997;Brown et al, 2000;Berger, 2001;Gotts et al, 2002;Parker et al, 2002a,b;Deadman and Schlager, 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

First principles of the MameLuke multi-actor modelling framework for land use change, illustrated with a Philippine case study

Huigen

2004

Journal of Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A role for goal-oriented autonomous agents in modeling people-environment interactions in forest recreation

Cited by 41 publications

References 26 publications

Spatial process and data models: Toward integration of agent-based models and GIS

Spatial process and data models: Toward integration of agent-based models and GIS

Comparison of methods for a landscape-scale assessment of the cultural ecosystem services associated with different habitats

First principles of the MameLuke multi-actor modelling framework for land use change, illustrated with a Philippine case study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About