Modeling and Simulating Terrorist Networks in Social and Geospatial Dimensions

A simple theoretical multiagent model reasons about the criticality of terrorists and regions as terrorist interactions coevolve in geographical and social spaces. Social and spatial relations evolve over time. Estimating their evolutions is important for management, command and control structures, and intelligence analysis research. By knowing future agent social and spatial distributions, an analyst can identify emergent leaders, hot spots, and organizational vulnerabilities. Historically, such estimations have depended heavily on qualitative data analyses by subject-matter experts. A few researchers approached the issue using multiagent models and simulation. The models addressed the complex nature of the organization and task assignments, resource distributions, or agent locations. The simulations addressed the near-term organizational changes. This research came from two perspectives: the effects of change in the social network and the effects of geospatial change. Both perspectives can project aspects of emerging organizational structure and future performance, but they can't examine the interaction between physical and social movements.

[1]  Daniel C. Feldman,et al.  Expatriation, Repatriation, and Domestic Geographical Relocation: An Empirical Investigation of Adjustment to new Job Assignments , 1993 .

[2]  M E J Newman,et al.  Identity and Search in Social Networks , 2002, Science.

[3]  Kathleen M. Carley,et al.  Toward an interoperable dynamic network analysis toolkit , 2007, Decis. Support Syst..

[4]  Olav Sorenson,et al.  Syndication Networks and the Spatial Distribution of Venture Capital Investments1 , 2001, American Journal of Sociology.

[5]  Jim Harper,et al.  Effective Counterterrorism and the Limited Role of Predictive Data Mining , 2006 .

[6]  Varvara Mitliaga,et al.  Networks and Netwars - The Future of Terror, Crime, and Militancy , 2002, Int. J. Law Inf. Technol..

[7]  M. McPherson,et al.  Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks , 2001 .

[8]  D. Wegner Transactive Memory: A Contemporary Analysis of the Group Mind , 1987 .

[9]  Kathleen M. Carley,et al.  Modeling Organizational Adaptation as a Simulated Annealing Process , 1996 .

[10]  Kathleen M. Carley,et al.  Computational organization science: A new frontier , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[11]  Marc Sageman,et al.  Understanding terror networks. , 2004, International journal of emergency mental health.

[12]  Kathleen M. Carley On generating hypotheses using computer simulations , 1999 .

[13]  Kathleen M. Carley Destabilization of covert networks , 2006, Comput. Math. Organ. Theory.

[14]  Vijayalakshmi Atluri,et al.  Detecting Anomalous Geospatial Trajectories through Spatial Characterization and Spatio-Semantic Associations , 2004, DG.O.

[15]  Joshua M Epstein,et al.  Modeling civil violence: An agent-based computational approach , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[16]  Toby E. Stuart,et al.  Syndication Networks and the Spatial Distribution of Venture Capital Investments1 , 1999, American Journal of Sociology.

[17]  Raymond J. Mooney,et al.  Relational Data Mining with Inductive Logic Programming for Link Discovery , 2002 .

[18]  Destabilizing networks , 2002 .

[19]  T. Snijders,et al.  Modeling the Coevolution of Networks and Behavior , 2007 .

[20]  Kathleen M. Carley,et al.  Going Beyond the Data: Empirical Validation Leading to Grounded Theory , 2004, Comput. Math. Organ. Theory.

[21]  Paul Davidsson,et al.  A Hybrid Micro-Simulator for Determining the Effects of Governmental Control Policies on Transport Chains , 2004, MABS.

[22]  Hsinchun Chen,et al.  Intelligence and security informatics for homeland security: information, communication, and transportation , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.