Age of companies in S&P500
This model attempts to understand the behavior of average lifetime of companies in the S&P500 index. The reference mode for the model is a graph available at this link: https://static-cdn.blinkist.com/ebooks/Blinkracy-Blinkist.pdf (page 5) which was discussed in the System Thinking World Discussion forum.
Mergers & Acquisitions can be one of the reasons for older companies to be replaced with newer companies in the Index. With M&A of older companies, the empty slots are taken over by newer companies. However, overtime, these new companies themselves become old. With steady M&A, the stock of older companies decreases and stock of newer companies increases. The result is that average age of the companies in the S&P Index decreases.
The oscillations in the diagram, according to me, is due to oscillations in the M&A activity.
There are two negative feedback loops in the model. (1) As stock of new companies increases, the number of companies getting older increases which in turn decreases the stock. (2) As M&A increases, stock of older companies decreases which in turn decreases M&A activities.
Limits of the model
The model does not consider factors other than M&A in the increase in number of new companies in the Index. New companies themselves may have exceptional performance which will result in their inclusion in the Index. Changes in technology for example Information Technology can usher in new companies.
1. It is assumed that M&A results in addition of new companies to the Index. There could be other older companies too, which given the opportunity, can move into the Index. Emergence of new technologies brings in new companies.
Active and Passive Internet of Things
Active and Passive Internet of Things - Regulated
Mental Models of Dynamic Systems
C difficile and Whole Genome Sequencing
To find total cases or total cost with or without WGS, run the simulation twice with WGS = 0 and WGS = 1 (make sure you record the values each time)
Refresh page to restore default values
Warning:Initial proportion of asymptomatically colonised patients + Initial proportion of symptomatically infected patients must be < 1
Proportion of admissions asymptomatically colonised + Proportion of admissions with symptomatic infection must be <1
Email firstname.lastname@example.org with queries or comments
Acceptance of System Dynamics
Based on a dialogue on the System Dynamics mailing list regarding the current level of acceptance of System Dynamics after it has been promoted for over 40 years I dredged up the following set of influences as a thought exercise. This is an example of a Drifting Goals Systems Archetype.
Oferta y demanda de materiales de construcción en Cali
Google Adwords Model
Sterman Model (2002)
The Tyranny of small steps archetype (agent based)
Haraldsson, H. V., Sverdrup, H. U., Belyazid, S., Holmqvist, J. and Gramstad, R. C. J. (2008), The Tyranny of Small Steps: a reoccurring behaviour in management. Syst. Res., 25: 25–43. doi: 10.1002/sres.859
Construction Rework SD
Investigation of Predator/Prey Modal 1 Scenario 3
First SD Model: Predator Prey Model with Squirrels, Mountain Lions, and Hunters
I complicated the model by adding 15 hunters to the landscape. Now, the model starts with 150 squirrels, 100 mountain lions, and 15 hunters. This model operates under the assumption that hunters want to kill mountain lions, who presumably try to eat the farm animals that represent the hunters' livelihoods. I made the mountain lion death rate dependent on the number of hunters, and the model changed such that the squirrel population exploded and the mountain lion population approached extinction every 20 years. I based this model on a real event, which took place and is still taking place in the Sierra Nevada. Squirrel populations there apparently reached record levels when farmers seeking to protect their land killed off the vast majority of the mountain lion population there. Now, hunters in the area kill squirrels for sport because they disrupted the food chain so irrevocably.