Mathematics VS? Agent Based Modeling

[Nick Thompson]

Russell,
 
Interesting. Is ANY formal system mathematical, ipso facto? Logic?
Astrology? Language? Iambic Pentameter. Beethoven's Fifth (the interval is
actually a third). My [older] brother was a mathematician, and in the way
of families, I was both taught to be fascinated by it and warned away from
thinking about it. I was always delighted by algebraic simplification .....
the ability of a skilled algebraist to see the simple in the complex. Also,
the trick of making things easier by making them more complex as in 49 x
51. But are all formal systems mathematical? Is this what Bertram Russell
and Whitehead were mattering on about all those years ago?
 
Wish you could drop in tomorrow and straighten me out!
 
NIck
 
Nicholas S. Thompson
Professor of Psychology and Ethology
Clark University
[hidden email]
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/
[hidden email]

Nicholas S. Thompson
Professor of Psychology and Ethology
Clark University
[hidden email]
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/
 [hidden email]


> [Original Message]
> From: Russell Standish <[hidden email]>
> To: <[hidden email]>; The Friday Morning Applied Complexity
Coffee Group <[hidden email]>

> Date: 3/11/2005 8:10:14 PM
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Mathematics VS? Agent Based Modeling
>
> I think mathematics is the study of formal systems, period. Therefore
> an ABM system is as much mathematics as say computer algebra, or
> solving a differential equation, whether numerically or symbolically.
>
> That it can be quite difficult to actually understand what is
> happening with an ABM shouldn't count against its formal
> character. After all, who said mathematics was easy?
>
> Cheers
>
> PS - I'm aware my position contrasts with Stephen Wolfram's in NKS.
>
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 06:17:09PM -0700, Nicholas Thompson wrote:
> > Dear Friamers,
> >
> > I have been engaged with a long correspondence with one of my friends

at Clark, a mathematicain.  I was trying to entice him into teaching a Net
Logo course with me next semester, and after some throat clearing, here was
his response.  I find the debate so very interesting that I wanted to hear
what you-all thought of it, and I got his permission to post it.    I will
identify him as ( Mathematicial Colleague).   MC and I are old friends and
those of you who know me know that I am given to .... uh.... rambunctious
discourse.  So the tone here is my tone, not really his.  I think you will
enjoy it.  

> >
> > MC --More seriously, is there anything *mathematical* about
> > NetLogo modeling? My impression (without having gone to
> > the links below) is that it is just another--nicer looking,
> > easier-to-program, even conceptually cleaner--way to make
> > black boxes, and to that extent is no different from the Excel
> > spreadsheets that John Kennison occasionally pushes on people,
> > or the Java applets Dave Joyce programmed for you. Mathematics
> > may be *consumed* in the programming of the simulation, but there is
> > no mathematical analysis (and probably can't be), just an opaquely
> > imperspicuous *thing* with some toggles that can be adjusted so
> > as to create different--sometimes strikingly different--outputs.
> > So what, from a mathematical point of view? A mathematician,
> > when not acting as an engineer on hire, wants to *understand*
> > formal structures by formal means. Where's the understanding,
> > here? How is this different--from the point of view of a
> > mathematician who wants to do mathematics--from programs that
> > produce fractal images? Look, a cloud! Look, waves! Look,
> > a tiger's pelt! Pretty!
>
> --
> *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which
> is of type "application/pgp-signature". Don't worry, it is not a
> virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this
> email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you
> may safely ignore this attachment.
>
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> A/Prof Russell Standish             Director
> High Performance Computing Support Unit, Phone [phone]
(mobile)
> UNSW SYDNEY 2052                     Fax   [phone] (")
> Australia             [hidden email]            
> Room 2075, Red Centre                  
http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
>             International prefix  +612, Interstate prefix 02
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Stephen Guerin]

ah, the good ole' ABM v. EBM debate...

Parunak has a good '98 paper from a practioners perspective:
"Agent-Based Modeling vs. Equation-Based Modeling"
http://www.pscs.umich.edu/education/CSCS-courses/cscs530/W02/Txt/mabs98.pdf

And then, by contrast, I like how Eric Bonabeau tries to change the focus
from ABM vs. EBM to stressing the distinction of Macro vs. Micro approaches
to modeling:

"Agent-based modeling: Methods and techniques for simulating human systems"
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/99/suppl_3/7280
"ABM is a mindset more than a technology. The ABM mindset consists of
describing a system from the perspective of its constituent units. A number
of researchers think that the alternative to ABM is traditional differential
equation modeling; this is wrong, as a set of differential equations, each
describing the dynamics of one of the system's constituent units, is an
agent-based model. A synonym of ABM would be microscopic modeling, and an
alternative would be macroscopic modeling."

-Steve

___________________________________________________________________
[hidden email]
www.Redfish.com
624 Agua Fria Street, Santa Fe, NM 87501
mobile: [phone]
office: Santa Fe, NM [phone] / London, UK [phone]

[Stephen Guerin]

Nick writes to Russell:
>Wish you could drop in tomorrow and straighten me out!

What do you say, Russell? 16,000 miles of air travel for some really good
coffee and we'll throw in a breakfast burrito?

-S

[Russell Standish]

Sounds nice. A little icy fresh air sounds like just the shot to cure
the summer sweats. Now just where did I leave that quantum teleporter?

Cheers

On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 12:33:08AM -0700, Stephen Guerin wrote:

> Nick writes to Russell:
> >Wish you could drop in tomorrow and straighten me out!
>
> What do you say, Russell? 16,000 miles of air travel for some really good
> coffee and we'll throw in a breakfast burrito?
>
> -S
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9AM @ Jane's Cafe
> Lecture schedule, archives, unsubscribe, etc.:
> http://www.friam.org

--
*PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which
is of type "application/pgp-signature". Don't worry, it is not a
virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this
email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you
may safely ignore this attachment.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A/Prof Russell Standish             Director
High Performance Computing Support Unit, Phone [phone] (mobile)
UNSW SYDNEY 2052                     Fax   [phone] (")
Australia             [hidden email]            
Room 2075, Red Centre                    http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
            International prefix  +612, Interstate prefix 02
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Robert Holmes]

And ah, the usual grandiose claims for ABMs. I particularly liked the
suggestion that ABMs were appropriate for situations where "...simulation of
a system is part of a larger project whose desired outcome is a control
scheme that more or less automatically regulates the behavior of the entire
system."

And that got me thinking: has there been any (and I do mean any) real-world
examples of using an ABM in a closed-loop control system (i.e. one that
doesn't just produce some estimates of a control paramter but actually
enacts them)? Such control systems are all around us and - as far as I can
make out - they are all examples of EBMs (even the analogue ones).

Robert

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Guerin [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Friday, March 11, 2005 12:21 AM
> To: [hidden email]; The Friday Morning Applied
> Complexity Coffee Group
> Subject: RE: [FRIAM] Mathematics VS? Agent Based Modeling
>
> ah, the good ole' ABM v. EBM debate...
>
> Parunak has a good '98 paper from a practioners perspective:
> "Agent-Based Modeling vs. Equation-Based Modeling"
> http://www.pscs.umich.edu/education/CSCS-courses/cscs530/W02/T

xt/mabs98.pdf

>
> And then, by contrast, I like how Eric Bonabeau tries to
> change the focus from ABM vs. EBM to stressing the
> distinction of Macro vs. Micro approaches to modeling:
>
> "Agent-based modeling: Methods and techniques for simulating
> human systems"
> http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/99/suppl_3/7280
> "ABM is a mindset more than a technology. The ABM mindset
> consists of describing a system from the perspective of its
> constituent units. A number of researchers think that the
> alternative to ABM is traditional differential equation
> modeling; this is wrong, as a set of differential equations,
> each describing the dynamics of one of the system's
> constituent units, is an agent-based model. A synonym of ABM
> would be microscopic modeling, and an alternative would be
> macroscopic modeling."
>
> -Steve
>
> ___________________________________________________________________
> [hidden email]
> www.Redfish.com
> 624 Agua Fria Street, Santa Fe, NM 87501
> mobile: [phone]
> office: Santa Fe, NM [phone] / London, UK [phone]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9AM @ Jane's Cafe
> Lecture schedule, archives, unsubscribe, etc.:
> http://www.friam.org
>
>
>