Robustness of Multi-agent Models: The Example of Collaboration between Turmites with Synchronous and Asynchronous Updating

The robusntess of multi-agent systems to simulation conditions is analysed through a precise example, invented by Langton to investigate the foundations of artificial life. This system is composed of simple and memoryless agents, the turmites, which obey simple discrete local rules. While the local rules that govern each agent are kept constant, the interaction between agents are modified through nine variations. Our method consists in varying the updating scheme (synchronous vs. asynchronous) and the local conflict resolution policy (strong or weak exclusion rules). We experimentally estimate the effect of these modifications on three collaborative phenomena. We also analyse how the dynamics at the microscopic scale reflects the robustness of the system at the macroscopic scale. Observations confirm that the definition of the agents' behaviour is not the only setting that matters in the emergence of collaborative phenomena in complex systems: the way the agents are updated is also a key choice.

[1]  T. E. Ingerson,et al.  Structure in asynchronous cellular automata , 1984 .

[2]  HighWire Press Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London , 1781, The London Medical Journal.

[3]  Nazim Fatès,et al.  How important are updating schemes in multi-agent systems? An illustration on a multi-turmite model , 2010, AAMAS.

[4]  Leonid A. Bunimovich,et al.  Recurrence properties of Lorentz lattice gas cellular automata , 1992 .

[5]  Christopher G. Langton,et al.  Studying artificial life with cellular automata , 1986 .

[6]  David Gale,et al.  Mathematical entertainments , 1995 .

[7]  J. Ferber,et al.  Influences and Reaction : a Model of Situated Multiagent Systems , 2001 .

[8]  Eric Goles Ch.,et al.  Dynamics of a class of ants on a one-dimensional lattice , 2004, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[9]  Nazim Fatès,et al.  Multi-agent Systems as Discrete Dynamical Systems: Influences and Reactions as a Modelling Principle , 2008 .

[10]  David Gale,et al.  Further Travels with My Ant , 1998 .

[11]  Bastien Chopard,et al.  Cellular Automata Modeling of Physical Systems: Index , 1998 .

[12]  E. Berlekamp,et al.  Winning Ways for Your Mathematical Plays , 1983 .

[13]  O. Beuret,et al.  Behaviour of Multiple Generalized Langton"s Ants , 1996 .

[14]  A. M. Turing,et al.  The chemical basis of morphogenesis , 1952, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences.

[15]  W. J. Freeman,et al.  Alan Turing: The Chemical Basis of Morphogenesis , 1986 .

[16]  Bastien Chopard,et al.  Cellular Automata Modeling of Physical Systems , 1999, Encyclopedia of Complexity and Systems Science.

[17]  Damien Regnault,et al.  Progresses in the analysis of stochastic 2D cellular automata: A study of asynchronous 2D minority , 2007, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[18]  Eric Goles Ch.,et al.  Complexity of Langton's ant , 2002, Discret. Appl. Math..

[19]  Elwyn R. Berlekamp,et al.  Winning Ways for Your Mathematical Plays, Volume 2 , 2003 .

[20]  Nazim Fatès,et al.  Examples of Fast and Slow Convergence of 2D Asynchronous Cellular Systems , 2008, J. Cell. Autom..

[21]  Eric Goles Ch.,et al.  Generalized Langton's Ant: Dynamical Behavior and Complexity , 2001, STACS.

[22]  Guy Theraulaz,et al.  A computational model of ant nest morphogenesis , 2011, ECAL.

[23]  Nazim Fatès Does Life Resist Asynchrony? , 2010, Game of Life Cellular Automata.

[24]  J. Boon,et al.  How Fast Does Langton's Ant Move? , 2000 .