That's what an experimental design is for. Without a plan to rationally
effect relationships. A good experimental design will define a series of
>
> Well, sitting here in the peanut gallery, I think one of the virtues of
> small, minimalist models is that they retain at least the option of
> having some explanatory value.
>
> I've seen too many instances where people naively try to capture as much
> of reality as they percieve in their models, and the only result is a
> muddled mess which has zero explanatory value. Even if its not a muddled
> mess, and the modeler has avoided making too many arbitrary choices, you
> still have to contend with the bounded rationality and understanding of
> your audience.
>
> I've seen models which could require hundreds of pages to fully describe
> and required massive supercomputers to run. At the end of they day, if
> you can't explain something, what's the point?
>
> Rich
>
>
> I've seen too many occasions when a
>
> Douglas Roberts wrote:
> > Josh presented this work to us at our of our NIH MIDAS meetings not
> > too long ago. Interesting stuff, but I frankly don't see what all the
> > FRIAMers are so agog about. We've all known for a while that
> > interesting behaviors can be observed from even the most simple A-Life
> > CA simulations (note that is did not use the word "emerge" once in the
> > above sentence. Up until this point, that is).
> >
> > What befuddles me is how much 'complexity scientists' seem to get off
> > on how simple simulations can sometimes produce interesting results,
> > rather than getting sufficiently cranked up to write *really* big,
> > *really* complex societal models, and to then use them to do *really*
> > big and complex simulation studies.
> >
> > This is not meant to imply any criticism against Josh's work -- it is
> > quite interesting, and he is a very good presenter. It's just that
> > after I see a set of simulation results for a simple simulation of a
> > very simple artificial society, it makes me want to see what a more
> > realistic, higher resolution one can do.
> >
> > I understand Josh's motivations for doing simple simulations. As he
> > states in the article, "the trick [was] to get a lot /out/, while
> > putting in as little as possible", which is cool, sure. To me,
> > however it's all about putting as much in as can be rationally
> > justified, and then turning the crank to see what pops out.
> >
> > Michael A: I agree, this thread would make an interesting WedTech
> topic.
> >
> > --Doug
> >
> > --
> > Doug Roberts, RTI International
> > droberts at rti.org <mailto:droberts at rti.org>
> > doug at parrot-farm.net <mailto:doug at parrot-farm.net>
> > 505-455-7333 - Office
> > 505-670-8195 - Cell
> >
> > On 6/27/07, *Michael Agar* <magar at anth.umd.edu
> > <mailto:magar at anth.umd.edu>> wrote:
> >
> > Good Lord. A shocking line to encounter on arrival in a Florida
> > motel.
> >
> > (That might be a way to start a Carl Hiassen mystery.)
> >
> > Probably the most interesting things that go on in workshops for
> > social/behavioral researchers who know a lot about their area but
> > little
> > about complexity/ABM is in the discussion space between domain
> > knowledge
> > and the concept of an ABM. Don't know what to call it, but it's got
> > something to do with clarity and creativity that feeds back into
> their
> > domain.
> >
> > This thread would make an interesting Wedtech conversation.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> >
> > >>> robert at holmesacosta.com <mailto:robert at holmesacosta.com>
> > 06/26/07 7:24 PM >>>
> > Good question - an explanation that's grounded in actual field
> > research
> > I
> > guess.
> >
> > IMHO, an ABM can never offer an explanation for a social
> > behaviour. All
> > it
> > can ever do (and I'm not being dismissive, I think this is
> > important) is
> > offer a suggestion for an explanation that can subsequently be
> > confirmed
> > or
> > denied by real social research/anthropology/enthnological field
> > research
> > program.
> >
> > I don't think this is a particularly strong claim. The logic
> > behind the
> > a
> > sugarscape or Netlogo style ABM seems to be (i) apply some micro
> > rules
> > to
> > checkers running round a checker board, (ii) generate an unexpected
> > macro
> > behaviour, (iii) offer the micro rules as an explanation of the
> macro
> > rules
> > then (iv) claim that this checker-board behaviour is analagous to
> > behaviour
> > of real people/animals/companies/other real world entities.
> >
> > Step (i) through (iii) are OK (though most ABM papers I see aren't
> as
> > upfront about the many-to-one nature of the explanation as Carl is
> in
> > his
> > email) but (iv) strikes me as a bit of a stretch; certainly I'd like
> > more
> > than vague assurances from the researcher that yes it's valid,
> honest.
> > It
> > doesn't strike me as unreasonable to ask for some evidence that
> > the leap
> > in
> > (iv) is reasonable. But how often do we see that in the
> > literature? As I
> > suggest above, there's plenty of social research techniques that
> could
> > generate that evidence. But I get the impression that the detailed
> > comparison of model with reality that you get in (say) the Ancestral
> > Pueblo
> > study is the exception rather than the rule.
> >
> > And this is why we need more Mike Agars in this world.
> >
> > Robert
> >
> >
> >
> > ============================================================
> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at
http://www.friam.org> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > ============================================================
> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at
http://www.friam.org>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at
http://www.friam.org>