Another way of saying this: If you want to model the acquisition and
effects of emergent patterns in your agents, you've got to do so without
introducing emergent patterns that already live in the mind of the
modeler. :)
I've always believed that the answer to this requirement must lie in
cognitive science techniques (or machine learning, if you don't care about
psychological plausibility).
-- Mark
Mark P. Line
Nuno David wrote:
>> I can think of one specific example, primitive wars, I can write a
>> fairly
>> complete description of what should be in the model. It does have the
>> agents observing and the results of their observations affecting
>> behavior.
>> We even have observations to check the model behaves like the real
>> world.
>> http://cniss.wustl.edu/workshoppapers/gatpres1.pdf
>
> But then again, you know a priori what agents are going to observe and
> conceptualize, the vocabulary of the agents is pre-defined and the concept
> underlying it was already defined and programmed.
> Agents can indeed observe and react but that is not sufficient to say that
> they observe and understand emergent effects. Of course, that depends upon
> the meaning one ascribes to "emergent effects" or "emergent macro
> structures" etc. If micro-macro and macro-micro effects is just a way of
> referring to and describing, the dynamics of the simulation (with whatever
> language one uses to do it), then I would say that most (if not all)
> simulations have "downward
> causation", "upward" etc, feedback mechanisms etc. I am not convinced that
> the
> intention of (2) and (3) below is just that one:
>
>>>>2. The simulation then automatically develops explicit data structures
>>>>that capture the emergent macro level structures. (These are not
>>>>internal
>>>>to agents, but are autonomous from them.)
>
>>>>3. These new data structures then have causal effects on the local
>>>> agents
>>>>and their interactions.
>
> best regards
> Nuno David
>
>
-- Mark
Mark P. Line
Bartlesville, OK
|