1

IB Math HL: Exploration Project

Modeling Europe’s Populations Using the Logistic Model with Carrying Capacity

Personal Code: fwj500

Word Count: 2464

 2

Introduction

Logistic equations are often taught in calculus classes and used to model

populations, such as bacteria or animals. In this investigation, I will focus on a specific

type of logistic equation, which models populations with a carrying capacity. Although in

math class we studied these models by solving math problems involving the population

of bacteria, I was interested in determining whether the world population could be

modeled with these equations, and whether a logistic model that takes carrying capacity

into account can model populations with a reasonable degree of accuracy. However, I

soon noticed that my original plan to model the population of the world using a logistic

equation with a carrying capacity would not work because the population of the world

has been growing at an approximately constant or increasing rate. Because my plan

was to find the carrying capacity of a human population, I decided that I needed to

model populations with a declining growth rates, and decided to model the population of

Europe since 1960. My goal in this exploration is to figure out whether the population of

Europe will reach a carrying capacity and stop growing at a specific population value.

However, another goal of this investigation is to identify limitations of a carrying capacity

model. A limitation that I thought I might encounter is that this model does not take into

account major events that can influence population trends, such as epidemics or mass

migrations in or out of a region.

 3

Rationale

The aim of this investigation is to determine a carrying capacity Europe, because

the trend in the population of these regions is that the population is growing at a slower

rate. I can also determine an equation to model the population of Europe based on the

assumption that there is a carrying capacity. The methodology will be solving a

differential equation and using the method of partial fraction decomposition, as well as

finding a general solution based on given initial values for the differential equation.

First, after gathering population data I will solve a differential equation to find a

logistic model for the population based two specific data points. Once I find one logistic

model for the population, I will use two different data points to determine another

equation to model the population. I will do this two times so that I have three equations

in total to compare to determine whether different samples from a data set affects the

final derived equation for the model. I will also compare these equations to an equation

derived from using data points that begin in 1980 instead of 1960, and determine

whether omitting data points can significantly affect the final equation derived from the

same model. Through the derivation of multiple models, I can assess the reliability of

this model and the extent to which this population data leads to a common model, as

well as uncovering limitations in applying mathematical models to a real life situation,

which often assume ideal conditions.

 4

First Logistic Population Model

The following is the data for the population of Europe for certain years since 1960 (Info)

Population of Europe since 1960

Year Population (Millions) Growth Rate

1960 605.619 6.063
1961 611.682 -
1970 657.221 4.155
1971 661.377 -
1980 693.859 2.943
1981 696.802 -
1990 721.086 1.993
1991 723.079 -
2000 726.407 0.046
2001 726.453 -
2010 735.394 0.921
2011 736.316 -
dp
The difference in population between consecutive years is equal to in the logistic
dt

equation, or the rate of change of population in any given year.

 5

This graph, created from the Logger Pro graphing software, has the general shape of a

graph with an asymptote. I was interested in exploring possible best-fit lines, such as an

exponential model or logarithmic model. Using the Logger Pro software, the two best-fit

lines I attempted ended up having the equations of

y  49.52 ln(kx) , where k=60660 +/- 67000, and

y  144.9*0.953x  749.4 , with relatively low uncertainty values in the constants.

The logarithmic graph is the best fit line that starts at a much lower y intercept and has a

higher y value than the exponential graph as x increases (towards the right side of the

graph, the curve is above the exponential graph). The logarithmic graph has high

uncertainty in the constants, and the exponential graph fits the data points much better

than the logarithmic graph, which suggests that the logistic equation, which is similar to

the exponential equation, is quite likely to fit the data set.

dp p dp Mp
The model for a logistic equation is  kp (1  ) , or  kp( ) , where M is the
dt M dt M

carrying capacity and P is the population at a given year (Powell). In this model, P will

represent the population during a specific year, while t will represent the number of

years that have passed since 1960. I will be using two data points to solve for k and M

in this logistic equation.

However, as we can see from the table, the year 2000 is an outlier, with a very low rate

of population growth. The rate is slower than the rate in 2010, which is a limitation for

this model because the model I will use assumes that the rate of population growth is

slowing down. I was interested in exploring the impact of this outlier on the final logistic

equation derived because it will help determine the extent that assumptions of

mathematical models must be met to reach an accurate conclusion.

 6

For the first equation that I will derive, the two data points that I will use are the

years 1980 and 1990. The population of these two years are 693.859 and 721.086,

respectively, based on the table, and the rates of population growth for these two years

are 2.943 and 1.993. I will substitute these values into the logistic differential equation to

solve for k and M through a system of two equations.

M  693.859
2.943  k *693.859*( )
M
M  721.086
1.993  k *721.086*( )
M

Dividing the first equation by the second equation eliminates k and by moving constants

to the left,

M  693.859
1.535 
M  721.086

1.535M 1106.588  M  693.859

M  771.456 , so the carrying capacity of Europe is approximately 771 million people

based on these two specific data points.

This value is interesting because the population statistics I used estimated that in

the near future, a population of approximately 740 million to 745 million will be the

maximum population of Europe before the population for Europe begins to decrease

(Info). This demonstrates that using math to solve a population model, such as the

logistic model that assumes ideal conditions, often does not take into account the

dynamic nature of real life issues such as human populations. Factors such as an influx

of migrations are not taken into account due to the assumptions of the model.
 7

Substituting this value for M back into the differential equation gives k  0.042 . Thus, by

substituting the values for k and M, the differential equation to model the population of

Europe is

dp p
 0.042 p(1  )
dt 771.456

By integrating this equation, I can find an equation for the population of Europe. First,

the variables must be separated, as this is a separable differential equation.

dp
 dt
p
0.042 p (1  )
771.456

18368dp
 dt
p(771.456  p)

After partial fraction decomposition of the left hand side of the equation, the left hand

18368dp
side can be integrated. To decompose into two more easily integrated
p(771.456  p)

18368dp
fractions, must be rewritten as
p(771.456  p)

18368 A B
 
p(771.456  p) p 771.456  p

Multiplying both sides by p(771.456  p) results in

18368  A(771.456  p)  Bp

Substituting the value p  0 solves for A, and A  23.810 , while substituting the value

p  771.456 solves for B, and B  23.810 . The differential equation can be rewritten as

23.810 23.810
 dp  dt
p 771.456  p
 8

Integrating the equation, and combining the integration constants into one constant,

23.810 ln | p | 23.810 ln | 771.456  p | t  C

p t
ln | |  C  0.042t  C
771.456  p 23.810

p
Ce0.042t 
771.456  p

To solve for C, the first data point, (0, 605.619), which represents the population of

605.619 million in 1960 (since the value of t is measured in the number of years passed

since 1960), will be substituted into the equation.

605.619
Ce0 
771.456  605.619
C  3.652

After solving for C, solving for P from this linear equation determines the final equation.

p (1  771.456e0.042t )  2817.275e0.042t
2817.275e0.042t 771.456
p 
1  3.652e 0.042 t
1  0.274e 0.042t
This seems like a logical equation because the carrying capacity, which is the

value in the numerator, is reasonable. However, to reach this final equation, I used two

specific data points that were space apart by 10 (the data points were the points at t=20

and t=30) and solved for the values of k and M. I will use other pairs of data points out

of the data set from the table and compare the other equations I derive. I will attempt to

use two points that are separated by a greater distance and also attempt to incorporate

the outlier data point (t=40, where the rate of growth was 0.046, a very small value). I

will compare constants such as carrying capacity and the power that the exponential in

the denominator is raised to (the value of r in the ert term in the denominator), which is

the Malthusian parameter and an indicator of the rate of maximum population growth
 9

(Weisstein). This is important to investigate because it will help me identify whether

analysis of a data set through this particular model, regardless of which data points

specifically are selected, will generally lead to a common final result. This will reveal

how much ideal models can account for uncertainty in real life situations.

General Solution and Other Derived Equations for the Model

I will derive a general formula for solving the equation from the logistic differential

equation, assuming that the values for k and M can be solved for or are known (Powell).

dp p
 kp (1  )
dt M

M dp
*  dt
k p( M  p)

1 A B
By partial fraction decomposition,  
p( M  p) p M  p

1  A( M  p)  Bp .

1
Substituting p=M gives the solution B  while substituting p=0 gives the solution
M

1
A . The equation will be rewritten as
M

1 1 1
(  )dp  dt . After integration,
k p Mp

p
ln | |
1 Mp
*(ln | p |  ln | M  p |)   t C
k k
 10

p
ln | | kt  C
Mp
p
Ce kt 
Mp
MCe kt M
p 
1  Ce kt
1
1  e  kt
C

Substituting the data point at t=0 and population p=p0, where p0 is the initial population,

p0
into the second equation returns the equation C  , so substituting this into the
M  p0

final equation returns

M
p , which is the formula I will use for the solution of this equation using
M  p0  kt
1 e
p0

different data points or different data sets.

Returning to the model of the population of Europe, I will use two data points that are

further apart for this other model. The data points I will use are the points (10, 657.221)

with a rate of growth of 4.155 and (50, 735.394) with a rate of growth of 0.921.

The logistic equation with these two data points, using the previously derived formula, is

754.706
p
1  0.246e 0.049t

I will also compare these equations to the model obtained when using the data points

(30, 721.1) with a rate of change of 1.993 and (40,726.407) with a rate of change of

0.046 to derive a final logistic equation. The final equation using these data points is

725.532
p
1  0.200e 0.037 t
 11

771.456
Comparing these two equations to the original equation, 1  0.274e 0.042t , the important

constants in these values are very similar. First, the carrying capacity values, which

equal the values on the numerators, suggest that using different data points can lead to

different derived equations for the model, being approximately 725, 755, and 771. The

Malthusian Parameter values also were not completely consistent, as the values were -

0.037, -0.042, and -0.049. In the equation involving the outlier data point of t=40, the

Malthusian Parameter was slightly different from the other values (equal to -0.037), and

the coefficient of the exponential in the denominator was also slightly different, being

equal to 0.274, compared to 0.246 and 0.200 when the outlier data point was not used.

Thus, while the constants in the logistic equations derived differed, this may somewhat

be accounted for by the fact that one of the models was based on an outlier. It would be

interesting to explore whether there is more agreement in the models when outlier data

points are not used at all.

Any limitation in the methodology to derive these logistic equations would apply to all

the three derived models. These limitations could arise from unforeseen factors

resulting from the dynamic nature of human populations, such as migrations or

changing cultural attitudes towards having children. Thus, this model is only accurate to

the extent that it predicts the future population if current population trends continue. The

first logistic equation derived from the data points (20, 693.859) and (30, 721.086),

771.5
y
1  0.274e 0.042 x , appears to fit the data set the best out of the derived equations.
 12

Thus, while this method has a medium degree of uncertainty, the equations derived

show some agreement over the values of the constants in the logistic model.

Finally, I will apply this model to the population with a different starting year, and

compare the equation to the previously derived equations to determine how much

changing the data set (in this case, omitting points) affects the final equation derived.

Specifically, I will use data points for the population beginning in 1980 instead of 1960.

In this new data set, the values for x are shifted down by twenty, because the starting

time of t=0 using a starting year of 1980 corresponds to the time value of t=20 using the

population data beginning in 1960. Based on this new data set, the previous points (30,

721.086) and (50, 735.394) translate to the points (10, 721.086) and (30, 735.394).

Using the points (10, 721.086) with a rate of change of 1.993 and (30, 735.394) with a

rate of change of 0.921, the population modeling equation becomes

 13

738.305
p . While the value for carrying capacity, 738.305, is close to the values
1  0.064e 0.092t

derived using the data set beginning in 1960, the constants in the denominator are quite

different from previously derived values. Thus, omitting data points significantly affects

the derived equation for the logistic model.

Conclusion

Based on the modeling of the population over time, the population of Europe fits the

logistic model. The carrying capacity is similar to the projected maximum population of

Europe, but there is some uncertainty because different carrying capacity values and

Malthusian Parameters were derived from using different data points to determine the

capacity. However, a major issue with these models is that they may not take into

account events that will change the rate of population growth of these regions. A

limitation of this investigation is that it only uses one model, the logistic model, for these

populations. Although the logistic model with a carrying capacity was justified because

of the declining rate of population growth in the regions modelled, an extension would

be to test how well other modelling equations with different sets of assumptions fit

populations that fit the assumptions of those models, and assess limitations of those

models. Examples of such extensions include using the single species model to model

the world population based on the birth and death rates in the world, or the Sinko-

Streifer model, which assumes a constant birth rate while taking into account the

mortality rate with respect to the population size (Population Size). Also, it would be

interesting to explore whether other fixed data sets, such as other populations, will

return approximately the same equation when other models are applied to the data sets,

regardless of what part of the data set was selected to determine the model.
 14

Works Cited

Info@worldpopulationhistory.info. "EUROPE Population 1958." EUROPE Population

1958 by UN Statistics since 1950 to 2100. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Jan. 2017.

<http://worldpopulationinhistory.info/EUROPE/1958/>.

"Population Size." Population Parameters: Estimation for Ecological Models (2008): 49-

101. Web. 16 Mar. 2017.

<http://www4.ncsu.edu/~rsmith/MA573_F15/Population_Models.pdf>.

Powell, James. "Solution of the Logistic Equation." Solution of the Logistic Equation.

USU Math, 31 July 2000. Web. 13 Mar. 2017.

<http://www.math.usu.edu/powell/ysa-html/node8.html>.

Weisstein, Eric W. "Logistic Equation." Logistic Equation -- from Wolfram MathWorld.

MathWorld, n.d. Web. 16 Mar. 2017.

<http://mathworld.wolfram.com/LogisticEquation.html>.
 15

Appendix:

Population of Europe since 1960

Year Population (Millions)

1960 605.619
1961 611.682 (growth: 6.063)
1970 657.221
1971 661.377 (growth: 4.155)
1980 693.859
1981 696.802 (growth: 2.943)
1990 721.086
1991 723.079 (growth: 1.993)
2000 726.407
2001 726.453 (growth: 0.046)
2010 735.394
2011 736.316 (growth: 0.921)

dp p
Note that all these derivations are based off the equation  kp (1  ) , which
dt M

dp Mp
can be rewritten as  kp( )
dt M

Derivation of values of k and M using the data points (10, 657.221) with a rate of

change of 4.155 and (50, 735.394) with a rate of change of 0.921

M  657.221
4.155  657.221k ( )
M
M  735.394
0.921  735.394k ( )
M

Dividing the two equations to cancel k and moving all the constants to the left side gives

M  657.221
5.048 
M  735.394

M  754.706

k  0.049
 16

M  p0 754.706  605.619
  0.246
p0 605.619

Derivation of the values of k and M using the data points (30, 721.1) with a rate of

change of 1.993 and (40,726.407) with a rate of change of 0.046:

M  721.086
1.993  721.086k ( )
M
M  726.407
0.046  726.407 k ( )
M
M  721.086
43.646 
M  726.407
M  726.532
k  0.037
M  p0 726.532  605.619
  0.200
p0 605.619

Derivation of the values of k and M using the data points (10, 721.086) with a rate of

change of 1.993 and (30, 735.394) with a rate of change of 0.921 from data set with

population of Europe beginning in the year 1980

M  721.086
1.993  721.086k ( )
M
M  735.394
0.921  735.394k ( )
M
M  721.086
2.122 
M  735.394
M  748.146
k  0.074
M  p0 738.305  693.859
  0.078
p0 693.859