Scale Transfer Modeling: Using Emergent Computation for Coupling an Ordinary Differential Equation System with a Reactive Agent Model

This article deals with the coupling of analytical models with individual based models design with the reactive agents paradigm. Such a coupling of models of different natures is motivated by the need to find a way to model scale transfer in large complex systems, i.e. to model how low level of organization can be made to influence upper level and vice versa. This is a fundamental issue, and more particularly in ecological modeling where models are a real scientific tool of investigation. Individuals and populations are not described at the same scale of time and space but it is known that they act on each others. Based on this example, we model individuals in their environment and the population dynamics. While behavior is best modeled using an algorithmic framework (the reactive agent paradigm), population dynamics (because of the number of interacting entities) is best modeled using numerical models. We propose the use of the concept of emergent computation as a framework for coupling heterogeneous formalisms. In the same time, it is crucial to be aware of the consequences of the simplifications and of the choices that are made in the reactive agent model, such as the topology of space and various parameters. In this article, we discuss these issues and our approach on a case study drawn from marine ecology and we show that it is possible to find classical mathematical functional responses with a reactive agent system. Then, we propose a methodology to deal with the coupling of heterogeneous formalism useful in any kind of system modeling.

[1]  D. DeAngelis,et al.  New Computer Models Unify Ecological TheoryComputer simulations show that many ecological patterns can be explained by interactions among individual organisms , 1988 .

[2]  Craig W. Reynolds Flocks, herds, and schools: a distributed behavioral model , 1987, SIGGRAPH.

[3]  V. Grimm Ten years of individual-based modelling in ecology: what have we learned and what could we learn in the future? , 1999 .

[4]  Shaun Lovejoy,et al.  Universal multifractal analysis as a tool to characterize multiscale intermittent patterns : example of phytoplankton distribution in turbulent coastal waters , 1999 .

[5]  G. G. Stokes "J." , 1890, The New Yale Book of Quotations.

[6]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  The appeal of parallel distributed processing , 1986 .

[7]  J. Timothy Wootton,et al.  Local interactions predict large-scale pattern in empirically derived cellular automata , 2001, Nature.

[8]  Dorothea Heiss-Czedik,et al.  An Introduction to Genetic Algorithms. , 1997, Artificial Life.

[9]  Tommaso Toffoli,et al.  Cellular Automata as an Alternative to (Rather than an Approximation of) Differential Equations in M , 1984 .

[10]  James T. Tanner,et al.  THE STABILITY AND THE INTRINSIC GROWTH RATES OF PREY AND PREDATOR POPULATIONS , 1975 .

[11]  F. Carlotti,et al.  A model for Acartia tonsa: effect of turbulence and consequences for the related physiological processes , 1996 .

[12]  C. S. Holling Some Characteristics of Simple Types of Predation and Parasitism , 1959, The Canadian Entomologist.

[13]  Paul A. Fishwick,et al.  Simulation model design and execution - building digital worlds , 1995 .

[14]  C. H. Dagli,et al.  Emergence and artificial life , 2003, IEMC '03 Proceedings. Managing Technologically Driven Organizations: The Human Side of Innovation and Change.

[15]  Jean Benoîst Chabrol,et al.  Théorie générale des systèmes , 1973 .

[16]  T. Gross,et al.  Perception of inert particles by calanoid copepods: behavioral observations and a numerical model , 1998 .

[17]  V. Volterra Fluctuations in the Abundance of a Species considered Mathematically , 1926 .

[18]  Jacques Ferber,et al.  Multi-agent systems - an introduction to distributed artificial intelligence , 1999 .

[19]  Volker Grimm,et al.  MATHEMATICAL MODELS AND UNDERSTANDING IN ECOLOGY , 1994 .

[20]  Volker Grimm,et al.  Individual-based modelling and ecological theory: synthesis of a workshop , 1999 .

[21]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Parallel distributed processing: explorations in the microstructure of cognition, vol. 1: foundations , 1986 .

[22]  Rodney A. Brooks,et al.  Elephants don't play chess , 1990, Robotics Auton. Syst..

[23]  J Uchmański,et al.  Individual-based modelling in ecology: what makes the difference? , 1996, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[24]  Stephanie Forrest,et al.  Emergent computation: self-organizing, collective, and cooperative phenomena in natural and artificial computing networks , 1990 .

[25]  Christophe Le Page,et al.  How Spatial Heterogeneity Influences Population Dynamics: Simulations in SEALAB , 1996, Adapt. Behav..

[26]  P. Tiselius,et al.  Foraging behaviour of six calanoid copepods: observations and hydrodynamic analysis , 1990 .

[27]  C. Wissel,et al.  Reconciling Classical and Individual‐Based Approaches in Theoretical Population Ecology: A Protocol for Extracting Population Parameters from Individual‐Based Models , 1998, The American Naturalist.

[28]  V. Volterra Fluctuations in the Abundance of a Species considered Mathematically , 1926, Nature.

[29]  David R. Hill,et al.  Object-Oriented Analysis and Simulation , 1996 .

[30]  D. Brown,et al.  Models in Biology: Mathematics, Statistics and Computing , 1995 .

[31]  David Servat,et al.  Modelisation de dynamiques de flux par agents. Application aux processus de ruissellement, infiltration et erosion , 2000 .

[32]  M. Marchesi,et al.  Scaling and criticality in a stochastic multi-agent model of a financial market , 1999, Nature.