Simulating the re-concentration of dispersed habitation in the peripheral urban area using an artificial society approach

References

• Acheampong RA, Silva E. 2015. Land use–transport interaction modeling: a review of the literature and future research directions. J Transp Land Use. 8(3):11–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alonso W. 1964. Location and land use. toward a general theory of land rent. Cambridge (MA, USA): Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Angel S, Parent J, Civco DL, Blei A, Potere D. 2011. The dimensions of global urban expansion: estimates and projections for all countries, 2000–2050. Prog Plann. 75(2):53–107. doi:10.1016/j.progress.2011.04.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Axelrod RM. 1997. The complexity of cooperation: agent-based models of competition and collaboration. Princeton (NJ, USA): Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Axtell R, Epstein J. 1994. Agent-based modeling: understanding our creations. Bull Santa Fe Inst. 9(4):28–32.
   Google Scholar
• Bacci ML. 2017. A concise history of world population. Hoboken (NJ, USA): John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Batisani N, Yarnal B. 2009. Uncertainty awareness in urban sprawl simulations: lessons from a small US metropolitan region. Land Use Policy. 26(2):178–185. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2008.01.013.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Batty M. 2007. Cities and complexity: understanding cities with cellular automata, agent-based models, and fractals. Cambridge (MA, USA): The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Batty M, Xie Y, Sun Z. 1999. Modeling urban dynamics through GIS-based cellular automata. Comput Environ Urban Syst. 23(3):205–233. doi:10.1016/S0198-9715(99)00015-0.
   Google Scholar
• Beeson PE. 2017. Agglomeration economies and productivity growth. In: Milles ES, McDonald JF, editors. Sources of metropolitan growth. Oxfordshire (UK): Routledge; p. 19–33. https://www.amazon.co.jp/Sources-Metropolitan-Growth-John-McDonald/dp/1138533319/ref=monarch_sidesheet
   Google Scholar
• Behan K, Maoh H, Kanaroglou P. 2008. Smart growth strategies, transportation and urban sprawl: simulated futures for Hamilton, Ontario. The Canadian Geographer/Le Géographe Canadien. 52(3):291–308. doi:10.1111/j.1541-0064.2008.00214.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Belitski M, Desai S. 2016. Creativity, entrepreneurship and economic development: city-level evidence on creativity spillover of entrepreneurship. J Technol Transf. 41(6):1354–1376. doi:10.1007/s10961-015-9446-3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bertaud A, Richardson HW. 2004. Transit and density: Atlanta, the United States and Western Europe. In: Christine Bae C-H, Richardson HW, editor. Urban sprawl in Western Europe and the United States. London (UK): Informa; p. 293–310. https://www.routledge.com/Urban-Sprawl-in-Western-Europe-and-the-United-States/Bae-Richardson/p/book/9781138266438
   Google Scholar
• Bertolini L. 2020. From “streets for traffic” to “streets for people”: can street experiments transform urban mobility? Transport Rev. 40(6):734–753. doi:10.1080/01441647.2020.1761907.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhat CR, Sardesai R. 2006. The impact of stop-making and travel time reliability on commute mode choice. Transport Res Part B. 40(9):709–730. doi:10.1016/j.trb.2005.09.008.
   Google Scholar
• Calthorpe P. 1993. The next American metropolis: ecology, community, and the American dream. Princeton (NJ, USA): Princeton architectural press.
   Google Scholar
• Carmona M. 2021. Public places urban spaces: the dimensions of urban design. Oxfordshire (UK): Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Caves RW. 2004. Encyclopedia of the city. Oxfordshire (UK): Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Cervero R. 2004. Transit-oriented development in the United States: experiences, challenges, and prospects. Washington D.C. (USA): Transportation Research Board.
   Google Scholar
• Cervero R, Kockelman K. 1997. Travel demand and the 3Ds: density, diversity, and design. Transport Res Part D. 2(3):199–219. doi:10.1016/S1361-9209(97)00009-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke KC, Hoppen S, Gaydos L. 1997. A self-modifying cellular automaton model of historical urbanization in the San Francisco Bay area. Environ Plann B Plann Des. 24(2):247–261. doi:10.1068/b240247.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cotella G, Evers D, Rivolin UJ, Solly A. 2020. ESPON SUPER—sustainable urbanization and land-use practices in European regions. Luxembourg: ESPON EGTC.
   Google Scholar
• Curtis C. 2012. Delivering the’D’in transit-oriented development: examining the town planning challenge. J Transp Land Use. 5(3):83–99. doi:10.5198/jtlu.v5i3.292.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Bruijn H, Veeneman W. 2009. Decision-making for light rail. Trans Res Part A. 43(4):349–359.
   Google Scholar
• Deal B, Kim JH, Hewings GJ, Kim YW. 2013. Complex urban systems integration: the LEAM experiences in coupling economic, land use, and transportation models in Chicago, IL. In: Pagliara F, Bok M de Simmonds D, Wilson A, editors. Employment location in cities and regions. Berlin/Heidelberg (Germany): Springer; p. 107–131. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-642-31779-8”atlanta
   Google Scholar
• Deal B, Pan H, Timm S, Pallathucheril V. 2017. The role of multidirectional temporal analysis in scenario planning exercises and planning support systems. Comput Environ Urban Syst. 64:91–102. doi:10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2017.01.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deal B, Schunk D. 2004. Spatial dynamic modeling and urban land use transformation: a simulation approach to assessing the costs of urban sprawl. Ecol Econ. 51(1):79–95. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.04.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ding R. 2019. The complex network theory-based urban land-use and transport interaction studies. Complexity. 2019:1–14. doi:10.1155/2019/4180890.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ding X, Yu S, Miao Y, Wang C, Jin Z. 2022. Types, modes and influencing factors of urban shrinkage: evidence from the Yellow River Basin, China. Sustainability. 14(15):9213. doi:10.3390/su14159213.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drchal J, Čertickỳ M, Jakob M. 2016. VALFRAM: validation Framework for Activit-ybased Models. J Artifl Soc Social Simul. 19(3):5. doi:10.18564/jasss.3127.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drennan MP, Kelly HF. 2010. Measuring urban agglomeration economies with office rents. J Econ Geogr. 11(3):481–507. doi:10.1093/jeg/lbp066.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duranton G, Puga D. 2004. Micro-foundations of urban agglomeration economies. Handbook Reg Urban Econ. 4:2063–2117.
   Google Scholar
• Eaton J, Eckstein Z. 1997. Cities and growth: theory and evidence from France and Japan. Reg Sci Urban Econ. 27(4–5):443–474. doi:10.1016/S0166-0462(97)80005-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elkin T, McLaren D, Hillman M. 1991. Reviving the city: towards sustainable urban development. Friends of the Earth Trust. London (England): Continuum International Publishing. https://www.amazon.com/Reviving-City-Towards-Sustainable-Development/dp/090596683X
   Google Scholar
• Epstein JM. 2006. Generative social science: studies in agent-based computational modeling. Princeton (NJ, USA): Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Epstein JM, Axtell R. 1996. Growing artificial societies: social science from the bottom up. Cambridge (MA, USA): MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ewing R, Cervero R. 2010. Travel and the built environment: a meta-analysis. J American Plann Assoc. 76(3):265–294. doi:10.1080/01944361003766766.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ewing R, Tian G, Lyons T, Terzano K. 2017. Trip and parking generation at transit-oriented developments: five US case studies. Landsc Urban Plan. 160:69–78. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.12.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feng Y, Liu Y, Batty M. 2016. Modeling urban growth with GIS based cellular automata and least squares SVM rules: a case study in Qingpu–Songjiang area of Shanghai, China. Stochastic Environ Res Risk Assess. 30(5):1387–1400. doi:10.1007/s00477-015-1128-z.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Filatova T, Parker D, Van der Veen A. 2009. Agent-based urban land markets: agent’s pricing behavior, land prices and urban land use change. J Artifl Soc Social Simul. 12(1):3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Florida R. 2005. Cities and the creative class. Oxfordshire (UK): Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Florida R, Mellander C, Stolarick K. 2011. Creativity and prosperity: the global creativity index. Toronto (ON, Canada): University of Toronto.
   Google Scholar
• Frenkel A, Ashkenazi M. 2008. Measuring urban sprawl: how can we deal with it? Environ Plann B Plann Des. 35(1):56–79. doi:10.1068/b32155.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fujii S. 2008. An empirical test of hypothesis on influence of travel behavior on residential choice behavior: a fundamental study on transportation measures for promoting compact cities. JSTE Journal of Traffic Eng. 43(6):53–62.
   Google Scholar
• Garca-Palomares JC. 2010. Urban sprawl and travel to work: the case of the metropolitan area of Madrid. J Transport Geogr. 18(2):197–213. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2009.05.012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerland P, Raftery AE, Ševčková H, Li N, Gu D, Spoorenberg T, Alkema L, Fosdick BK, Chunn J, Lalic N, et al. 2014. World population stabilization unlikely this century. Science. 346(6206):234–237. doi:10.1126/science.1257469
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilbert N. 2008. Agent-based models. Sage: Singapore.
   Google Scholar
• Gimblett R, Daniel T, Cherry S, Meitner MJ. 2001. The simulation and visualization of complex human–environment interactions. Landsc Urban Plan. 54(1):63–79. doi:10.1016/S0169-2046(01)00126-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haase D, Lautenbach S, Seppelt R. 2010. Modeling and simulating residential mobility in a shrinking city using an agent-based approach. Environ Model Softw. 25(10):1225–1240. doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2010.04.009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Healey P. 2017. Making better places: the planning project in the twenty-first century. London (England): Bloomsbury Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Hebbert M. 2003. New urbanism? The movement in context. Built Environ. 29(3):193–209. doi:10.2148/benv.29.3.193.54285.
   Google Scholar
• Heilig GK. 2012. World urbanization prospects: the 2011 revision. New York (NY, USA): United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA), Population Division.
   Google Scholar
• Henderson JV. 2010. Cities and development. J Reg Sci. 50(1):515–540. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9787.2009.00636.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howard E. 1902. Garden cities of to-morrow. 2nd ed. Swan Sonnenshein: London, England.
   Google Scholar
• Hrelja R, Olsson L, Pettersson-Löfstedt F, Rye T. 2020. Transit oriented development (TOD): a literature review. In: Nationellt kunskapscentrum för kollektivtrafik. Vol. K2. Lund (Sweden). https://www.k2centrum.se/en
   Google Scholar
• Hunt JD. 2010. Stated preference examination of factors influencing residential attraction. In: Pagliara F, Preston J, Simmonds D, editors. Residential location choice. Berlin/Heidelberg (Germany): Springer; p. 21–59. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-642-12788-5
   Google Scholar
• Iacono M, Levinson D, El-Geneidy A. 2008. Models of transportation and land use change: a guide to the territory. J Plann Lit. 22(4):323–340. doi:10.1177/0885412207314010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ibraeva A, de Almeida Correia Gh, Silva C, Antunes AP. 2020. Transit-oriented development: a review of research achievements and challenges. Trans Res Part A. 132:110–130.
   Google Scholar
• Irwin EG. 2010. New directions for urban economic models of land use change: incorporating spatial dynamics and heterogeneity. J Reg Sci. 50(1):65–91. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9787.2009.00655.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs J. 1961. The death and life of great American cities. New York (NY, USA): Random House.
   Google Scholar
• Kakoi M, Nakamura R, Saito S. 2010. Causal structure modeling of consumer’s decision-making on selection of commercial facilities. Fukuoka Univ econ rev. 54(3–4):241–256.
   Google Scholar
• Kii M, Nakanishi H, Nakamura K, Doi K. 2016. Transportation and spatial development: an overview and a future direction. Transport Policy. 49:148–158. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2016.04.015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knudsen B, Florida R, Stolarick K, Gates G. 2008. Density and creativity in US regions. Annals Assoc American Geogr. 98(2):461–478. doi:10.1080/00045600701851150.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koike H, Morimoto A, Itoh K 2000. A study on measures to promote bicycle usage in Japan. In: Proceedings of the Velo Mondial 2000—World Bicycle Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
   Google Scholar
• Koster HR, Rouwendal J. 2012. The impact of mixed land use on residential property values. J Reg Sci. 52(5):733–761. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9787.2012.00776.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krugman P. 1996. The self-organizing economy. Hoboken (NJ, USA): Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Kulu H, Milewski N. 2007. Family change and migration in the life course: an introduction. Demogr Res. 17:567. doi:10.4054/DemRes.2007.17.19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kwapień J, Drożdż S. 2012. Physical approach to complex systems. Phys Rep. 515(3–4):115–226.
   Google Scholar
• Landry C. 2012. The creative city: a toolkit for urban innovators. Oxfordshire (UK): Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Levin S, Xepapadeas T, Crépin AS, Norberg J, De Zeeuw A, Folke C, Hughes T, Arrow K, Barrett S, Daily G, et al. 2013. Social-ecological systems as complex adaptive systems: modeling and policy implications. Environ Dev Econ. 18(2):111–132. doi:10.1017/S1355770X12000460
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu H, Silva EA. 2013. Simulating the dynamics between the development of creative industries and urban spatial structure: an agent-based model. In: Geertman S, Toppen F, Stillwell J, editors. Planning support systems for sustainable urban development. Berlin/Heidelberg (Germany): Springer; p. 51–72. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-642-37533-0
   Google Scholar
• Ma Y, Zhenjiang S, Kawakami M. 2013. Agent-based simulation of residential promoting policy effects on downtown revitalization. J Artifl Soc Social Simul. 16(2):2. doi:10.18564/jasss.2125.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malik A, Crooks A, Root H, Swartz M. 2015. Exploring creativity and urban development with agent-based modeling. J Artifl Soc Social Simul. 18(2):12. doi:10.18564/jasss.2722.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martinez LM, Viegas JM. 2017. Assessing the impacts of deploying a shared self-driving urban mobility system: an agent-based model applied to the city of Lisbon, Portugal. Inter J Trans Sci Technol. 6(1):13–27. doi:10.1016/j.ijtst.2017.05.005.
   Google Scholar
• Meyfroidt P, Chowdhury RR, de Bremond A, Ellis EC, Erb KH, Filatova T, Garrett R, Grove JM, Heinimann A, Kuemmerle T, et al. 2018. Middle-range theories of land system change. Global Environ Change. 53:52–67. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.08.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Statistic Bureau, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications. 2017. Labor force survey; [accessed 2022 Oct.], [ Available online: http://www.stat.go.jp/data/roudou/index.htm].
   Google Scholar
• Michels A, Kang JY, Wang S 2020. An exploration of the effect of buyer preference and market composition on the rent gradient using the ALMA framework. In: Proceedings of the 3rd ACM SIGSPATIAL International Workshop on GeoSpatial Simulation, Seattle (WA, USA). p. 48–51. https://dl.acm.org/doi/proceedings/10.1145/3423335
   Google Scholar
• Millward H. 2006. Urban containment strategies: a case-study appraisal of plans and policies in Japanese, British, and Canadian cities. Land Use Policy. 23(4):473–485. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2005.02.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitsuda Y, Ito S. 2011. A review of spatial-explicit factors determining spatial distribution of land use/land-use change. Landscape and Ecoll Engin. 7(1):117–125. doi:10.1007/s11355-010-0113-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport. 2017 . White paper on land, infrastructure and transport in 2016; [accessed 2022 Oct.], Available online: http://www.mlit.go.jp/hakusyo/mlit/h28/index.html].
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport. 2021. Environment: co2 emissions in transportation sector; [accessed Oct. 2022], [ Available online: https://www.mlit.go.jp/sogoseisaku/environment/sosei_environment_tk_000007.html].
   Google Scholar
• Moeckel R. 2017. Constraints in household relocation: modeling land-use/transport interactions that respect time and monetary budgets. J Transp Land Use. 10(1):211–228.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mori U, Mendiburu A, Álvarez M, Lozano JA. 2015. A review of travel time estimation and forecasting for advanced traveller information systems. Transport Metrica A. 11(2):119–157. doi:10.1080/23249935.2014.932469.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nagai H, Kurahashi S. 2021. Agent-based modeling of the formation and prevention of residential diffusion on urban edges. Sustainability. 13(22):12500. doi:10.3390/su132212500.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nigro A, Bertolini L, Moccia FD. 2019. Land use and public transport integration in small cities and towns: assessment methodology and application. J Transport Geogr. 74:110–124. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2018.11.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oba T, Matsuda S, Mochizuki A, Nakagawa D, Matsunaka R. 2008. Effect of urban railroads on the land use structure of local cities. WIT Trans Built Environ. 101:437–445.
   Google Scholar
• Oldenburg R. 1989. The great good place: café, coffee shops, community centers, beauty parlors, general stores, bars, hangouts, and how they get you through the day. MN (USA): Paragon House Publishers: Saint Paul.
   Google Scholar
• Pagliara F, Preston J, Kim JH. 2010. The impact of transport policy on residential location. In: Pagliara F, Preston J, Simmonds D, editors. Residential location choice. Berlin/Heidelberg (Germany): Springer; p. 115–136. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-642-12788-5
   Google Scholar
• Patel A, Crooks A, Koizumi N. 2012. Slumulation: an agent-based modeling approach to slum formations. J Artifl Soc Social Simul. 15(4):2. doi:10.18564/jasss.2045.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rafiee R, Mahiny AS, Khorasani N, Darvishsefat AA, Danekar A. 2009. Simulating urban growth in Mashad City, Iran through the SLEUTH model (UGM). Cities. 26(1):19–26. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2008.11.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Railsback SF, Grimm V. 2011. Agent-based and individual-based modeling: a practical introduction. Princeton (NJ, USA): Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rauws W. 2016. Civic initiatives in urban development: self-governance versus self-organisation in planning practice. Town Plann Rev. 87(3):339–362. doi:10.3828/tpr.2016.23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogers R. 1997. Cities for a small planet. London (England): Faber & Faber.
   Google Scholar
• Rubiera-Morollón F, Garrido-Yserte R. 2020. Recent literature about urban sprawl: a renewed relevance of the phenomenon from the perspective of environmental sustainability. Sustainability. 12(16):6551. doi:10.3390/su12166551.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Statistic Bureau, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications. 2017. Labor force survey of Internal Affairs and Communications, Statistic Bureau. Available online: http://www.stat.go.jp/data/roudou/index.htm
   Google Scholar
• Schelling TC. 1971. Dynamic models of segregation. J Math Sociol. 1(2):143–186. doi:10.1080/0022250X.1971.9989794.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shook E, Wang S. 2015. Investigating the influence of spatial and temporal granularities on agent-based modeling. Geogr Anal. 47(4):321–348. doi:10.1111/gean.12080.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sieverts T. 2003. Cities without cities: an interpretation of the Zwischenstadt. Oxfordshire (UK): Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Silva EA, Clarke KC. 2002. Calibration of the SLEUTH urban growth model for Lisbon and Porto, Portugal. Comput Environ Urban Syst. 26(6):525–552. doi:10.1016/S0198-9715(01)00014-X.
   Google Scholar
• Spencer GM. 2012. Creative economies of scale: an agent-based model of creativity and agglomeration. J Econ Geogr. 12(1):247–271. doi:10.1093/jeg/lbr002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Su S, Zhang J, He S, Zhang H, Hu L, Kang M. 2021. Unraveling the impact of TOD on housing rental prices and implications on spatial planning: a comparative analysis of five Chinese megacities. Habitat Int. 107:102309. doi:10.1016/j.habitatint.2020.102309.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taniguchi T, Takahashi Y, Nishikawa I 2010. Multi-agent simulation on relationship between individuals’ travel behavior and residential choice behavior. In: Proceedings of the SICE Annual Conference 2010, Taipei, Taiwan. IEEE. p. 1728–1733.
   Google Scholar
• Thomas R, Pojani D, Lenferink S, Bertolini L, Stead D, van der Krabben E. 2018. Is transit-oriented development (TOD) an internationally transferable policy concept? Reg Stud. 52(9):1201–1213. doi:10.1080/00343404.2018.1428740.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsai YH. 2005. Quantifying urban form: compactness versus ‘sprawl’. Urban Studies. 42(1):141–161. doi:10.1080/0042098042000309748.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• US High Speed Rail Association. 2015. The transit oriented development institute; [accessed 2022 Oct.], [ Available online: http://www.tod.org/].
   Google Scholar
• Utsunomiya K. 2016. Social capital and local public transportation in Japan. Res Transport Econ. 59:434–440. doi:10.1016/j.retrec.2016.02.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Delden L, Rowlings DW, Scheer C, Grace PR. 2016. Urbanisation-related land use change from forest and pasture into turf grass modifies soil nitrogen cycling and increases N2O emissions. Biogeosciences. 13(21):6095–6106. doi:10.5194/bg-13-6095-2016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webb R, Bai X, Smith MS, Costanza R, Griggs D, Moglia M, Neuman M, Newman P, Newton P, Norman B, et al. 2018. Sustainable urban systems: co-design and framing for transformation. Ambio. 47(1):57–77. doi:10.1007/s13280-017-0934-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wey WM. 2019. Constructing urban dynamic transportation planning strategies for improving quality of life and urban sustainability under emerging growth management principles. Sustainable Cities Soc. 44:275–290. doi:10.1016/j.scs.2018.10.015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu F. 2002. Calibration of stochastic cellular automata: the application to rural-urban land conversions. Interl J Geogr Inf Sci. 16(8):795–818. doi:10.1080/13658810210157769.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xie Y, Batty M. 2005. Integrated urban evolutionary modeling. In: Atkinson P, Foody GM, Darby SE, Wu F, editor. Geodynamics. Boca Raton (FL, USA): CRC Press; p. 273–294. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/edit/10.1201/9781420038101/geodynamics-peter-atkinson-giles-foody-steven-darby-fulong-wu?refId=5621236d-d129-4cdb-b90a-c6be5bb6e163&context=ubx
   Google Scholar
• Yamada K, Deguchi H. 2016. Simulation analysis of population dynamics based on autonomous residential choice in suburb areas. Trans Soci Inst Control Engin. 52(10):555–565. doi:10.9746/sicetr.52.555.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang L, Zeng G, Li D, Huang HJ, Stanley HE, Havlin S 2019 a . Scale-free resilience of real traffic jams. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 116(18):8673–8678. https://www.pnas.org/
   Google Scholar
• Zhang Y, Song R, van Nes R, He S, Yin W. 2019. b . Identifying urban structure based on transit-oriented development. Sustainability. 11(24):7241. doi:10.3390/su11247241.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou Y, Varquez AC, Kanda M. 2019. High-resolution global urban growth projection based on multiple applications of the SLEUTH urban growth model. Scientific Data. 6(1):1–10. doi:10.1038/s41597-019-0048-z.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar