Advertisement

Springer Nature is making Coronavirus research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Projectible predicates in analogue and simulated systems

Abstract

We investigate the relationship between two approaches to modeling physical systems. On the first approach, simplifying assumptions are made about the level of detail we choose to represent in a computational simulation with an eye toward tractability. On the second approach simpler, analogue physical systems are considered that have more or less well-defined connections to systems of interest that are themselves too difficult to probe experimentally. Our interest here is in the connections between the artifacts of modeling that appear in these two approaches. We begin by outlining an important respect in which the two are essentially dissimilar and then propose a method whereby overcoming that dissimilarity by hand results in usefully analogous behavior. We claim that progress can be made if we think of artifacts as clues to the projectible predicates proper to the models themselves. Our degree of control over the connection between interesting analogue physical systems and their targets arises from determining the projectible predicates in the analogue system through a combination of theory and experiment. To obtain a similar degree of control over the connection between large-scale, distributed simulations of complex systems and their targets we must similarly determine the projectible predicates of the simulations themselves. In general theory will be too intractable to be of use, and so we advocate an experimental program for determining these predicates.

the object of the natural history which I propose is...to give light to the discovery of causes and supply a suckling philosophy with its first food.

Francis Bacon, The Great Instauration

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Anderson M., Ensher J., Matthews M., Wieman C., Cornell E. (1995) Observation of Bose–Einstein condensation in a dilute atomic vapor. Science 269: 198

  2. Anderson J.R., Lebiere C. (1998) The atomic components of thought. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ

  3. Barceló, C., Liberati, S., & Visser, M. (2000). Analog gravity from Bose-Einstein condensates. arXiv:gr-qc/00110262 v1.

  4. Barceló, C., Liberati, S., & Visser, M. (2003). Probing semiclassical analogue gravity in Bos3-Einstein condensates with widely tunable interactions. arXiv:cond-matt/0307491 v2.

  5. Best, B. J. (2006). Using the EPAM theory to guide cognitive model rule induction. In Proceedings of the 2006 Behavior Representation in Modeling and Simulation Conference. Baltimore, MD: SISO.

  6. Birrell N.D., Davies P.C.W. (1982) Quantum fields in curved space. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

  7. Darken, C. J., & Jones, B. (2007). Computer graphics-based target detection for synthetic soldiers. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth Conference on Behavioral Representations in Modeling and Simulation. Norfolk, VA: SISO.

  8. Garay, L. J., Anglin, J. R., Cirac, J. I., & Zoller, P. (2000). Sonic analog of gravitational black holes in Bose-Einstein condensates. Physical Review Letters, 85, 4643. Version cited here: arXiv:gr-qc/0002015.

  9. Gluck, K. A., & Pew, R. W. (2001). Overview of the agent-based modeling and behavior representation (AMBR) model comparison project. In Proceedings for the 10th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation (pp. 3–6). Norflok, VA: SISO.

  10. Gluck, K. A., Staszewski, J. J., Richman, H., Simon, H. A., & Delahanty, P. (2001). The right tool for the job: Information processing analysis in categorization. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. London: Erlbaum.

  11. Goodman N. (1983) Fact, fiction, and forecast (4th edn). Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

  12. Mattingly J. (2006) Why Eppley and Hannah’s thought experiment fails. Physical Review D 73: 064025

  13. Roberts S., Pashler H. (2000) How persuasive is a good fit? A comment on theory testing. Psychological Review 107(2): 358–367

  14. Smith J.D., Minda J.P. (2000) Thirty categorization results in search of a model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 26: 3–27

  15. Unruh W.G. (1995) Sonic analogue of black holes and the effects of high frequencies on black hole evaporation. Physical Review D 51: 2827–2838

  16. Warwick, W., & Fleetwood, M. (2006). A bad hempel day: The decoupling of prediction and explanation in computational cognitive modeling. In Proceeding for the 2006 Fall Simulation Interoperability Workshop. Orlando, FL: SISO.

  17. Warwick, W., & Napravnik, L. (2005). SAFBots: A uniform interface for embedding human behavior representations in computer generated forces. In Proceedings for the Fourteenth Conference on Behavior Representation in Modeling and Simulation. Universal City, CA: SISO.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to James Mattingly.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mattingly, J., Warwick, W. Projectible predicates in analogue and simulated systems. Synthese 169, 465–482 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-008-9433-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • Computational modeling
  • Analogue modeling
  • Human performance
  • Theory structure