Social Simulation Comparison in Arbitrary Problem Domains: First Steps Towards a More Principled Approach

We outline a simulation development process, backed by a software framework, which focuses on developing and using a partial conceptual model as a ‘lens’ to compare and possibly re-implement existing models in a chosen problem domain (as well as to design new models). To make this feasible for existing models of arbitrary structure and background social theory, we construct our (partial) conceptual model in a way that acknowledges that it is a base representation which any individual model will typically add detail to, and abstract away from, in various ways which we argue can be formalised. A given model’s design is fitted to the conceptual model to capture how its structural architecture (and selected aspects of the system’s state and driving processes) map to the conceptual model. This fit can be used to produce incomplete skeleton code which can then be extended to produce a simulation. Along the way, we use robust decision-making to provide a useful frame and discuss how our approach differs from others. This is inevitably a preliminary approach to a broad and difficult problem, which we explore in the conclusions.

[1]  R. Hegselmann,et al.  Simulating Social Phenomena , 1997 .

[2]  Sean Luke,et al.  MASON: A Multiagent Simulation Environment , 2005, Simul..

[3]  Evans,et al.  Domain-driven design , 2003 .

[4]  Keiki Takadama,et al.  Progress in Model-To-Model Analysis , 2008, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[5]  J Swanson,et al.  Business Dynamics—Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World , 2002, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[6]  Hans H. Kron,et al.  Programming-in-the-Large Versus Programming-in-the-Small , 1976, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[7]  Daniel G. Brown,et al.  Illustrating a new conceptual design pattern for agent-based models of land use via five case studies—the MR POTATOHEAD framework , 2008 .

[8]  Keith Bell,et al.  A workflow hybrid as a multi-model, multi-paradigm simulation framework , 2010 .

[9]  Gerard P. J. Dijkema,et al.  Agent-based modeling of energy infrastructure transitions , 2008, 2008 First International Conference on Infrastructure Systems and Services: Building Networks for a Brighter Future (INFRA).

[10]  John D. Sterman,et al.  Business dynamics : systems thinking and modelling for acomplex world , 2002 .

[11]  B. Edmonds,et al.  Replication, Replication and Replication: Some hard lessons from model alignment , 2003, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[12]  S. Moss.  Relevance, Realism and Rigour: A Third Way for Social and Economic Research , 1999 .

[13]  J. Gareth Polhill,et al.  Using the ODD Protocol for Describing Three Agent-Based Social Simulation Models of Land-Use Change , 2008, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[14]  Bernard P. Zeigler,et al.  Theory of Modeling and Simulation: Integrating Discrete Event and Continuous Complex Dynamic Systems , 2000 .

[15]  D. Finegold.  Book and Resource Reviews , 2005 .

[16]  Robert J Lempert,et al.  A new decision sciences for complex systems , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[17]  Roberto Leombruni,et al.  A Common Protocol for Agent-Based Social Simulation , 2006, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[18]  Hans H. Kron,et al.  Programming-in-the-Large Versus Programming-in-the-Small , 1975 .

[19]  Martin Fowler,et al.  Patterns of Enterprise Application Architecture , 2002 .

[20]  Kees M. van Hee,et al.  Workflow Management: Models, Methods, and Systems , 2002, Cooperative information systems.

[21]  Scott Moss,et al.  Alternative Approaches to the Empirical Validation of Agent-Based Models , 2007, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[22]  L. Tesfatsion,et al.  Dynamic Testing of Wholesale Power Market Designs: An Open-Source Agent-Based Framework , 2007 .

[23]  Robert L. Axtell,et al.  Aligning simulation models: A case study and results , 1996, Comput. Math. Organ. Theory.

[24]  Robert Axelrod,et al.  Advancing the art of simulation in the social sciences , 1997, Complex..