Re: [Swarm-Modelling] ABM in Nature

[Steve Railsback]

Alex Lancaster wrote:
> SR> But in the paper they discuss what individuals know and do, so I
> SR> infer it is an individual-based model. If not, they could not have
> SR> resisted showing the math. (There is nothing on the 'supplemental
> SR> information' site that provides any more information on the
> SR> model.)
>
> That's bad enough it in itself, you shouldn't have to *infer* the
> model being used, it should be explicit in the paper.  Somebody should
> write a letter to Nature requesting a more detailed explanation of the
> model, if it's not published in *full detail*, how can it be
> reproduced? ;-)
>
> A.

Ah, as I explained to Gary off-list, one of the benefits of publishing 
in Nature (or Science) is that they have extremely limited space, so it 
is impossible to describe your work in full detail.

(However, they do allow extra material to be posted at their web site, 
which in this case also did not include a description of the model.)

Steve

--
Lang Railsback & Assoc.
250 California Ave.
Arcata, California 95521
707 822 0453