Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Coupling agent based simulation with dynamic networks analysis to study the emergence of mutual knowledge as a percolation phenomenon

  • Published:
Journal of Systems Science and Complexity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The emergence of mutual knowledge is a major cognitive mechanism for the robustness of complex socio-technical systems. It has been extensively studied from an ethnomethodological point of view and empirically reproduced by multi-agent simulations. Whilst such simulations have been used to design real work settings the underlying theoretical grounding for the process is vague. The aim of this paper is to investigate whether the emergence of mutual knowledge (MK) in a group of colocated individuals can be explained as a percolation phenomenon. The followed methodology consists in coupling agent-based simulation with dynamic networks analysis to study information propagation phenomena: After using an agent-based simulation the authors generated and then analyzed its traces as networks where agents met and exchanged knowledge. Deep analysis of the resulting networks clearly shows that the emergence of MK is comparable to a percolation process. The authors specifically focus on how changes at the microscopic level in the proposed agent based simulator affect percolation and robustness. These results therefore provide theoretical basis for the analysis of social organizations.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mell J, Study of verbal communication between pilot and airtraffic controller in standard and non-standard situations, Doctoral Thesis, Paris: Ecole Nationale de l’Aviation Civile, 1992.

  2. Hutchins E, The technology of team navigation. In Intellectual Teamwork. Eds. by Galegher J, Kraut R E, and Edigo C, Hillsdale, NJ: LEA, 1990.

  3. Bressolle M C, Pavard B, and Leroux M, The role of multimodal communication in cooperation and intention recognition: The case of air traffic control, Proceedings of the International Conference on Cooperative Multimodal Communication, Theory and Applications, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 24–26 May, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Lalouette C and Pavard B, Enhancing interorganizational resilience by loose coupling concept and complexity paradigm, Proceedings of the Third Resilience Engineering Symposium, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Moffat J, Modelling human decision-making in simulation models of conflict, The International C2 Journal, 2007, 1(1): 31–60.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Rateb F, Pavard B, et al. Modelling malaria with multi-agent systems, International Journal of Intelligent Information Technologies, 2005, 1(2): 17–27.

  7. Pavard B, Dugdale J, Saoud N, et al., Design of robust sociotechnical systems, Resilience Engineering: Remaining Sensitive to the Possibility of Failure, Ashgate, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Broadbent S R and Hammersley J M, Percolation processes. I. Crystals and Mazes, Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 1957, 53: 53–629.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Bunde A and Havlin S, Percolation and disordered systems: Theory and applications, Physica A, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Cantono S and Solomon S, New J. Phys., 2010, 12(7): 075038.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Solomon S, Weisbuch G, de Arcangelis L, et al., Social percolation models, Physica A, 2000, 277(1–2): 239–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Roussenq J, Percolation, Encyclopaedia Universalis, 1992, 17: 17–838.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Pajot S, Percolation et économie, thèse de doctorat de l’Universite de Nantes, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kesten H, Percolation theory and first-passage percolation, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society B, 1987, 16: 16–23.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Barrat A, Barthelemy M, and Vespignani A, Dynamical Processes on Complex Networks, Cambridge University Press, 2008.

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Callaway D S, Newman M E J, Strogatz S H, et al., Network robustness and fragility: Percolation on random graphs, Phys. Rev. Lett., 2000, 85: 85–5468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Newman M E J, The structure and function of complex networks, SIAM Rev., 2003, 45: 45–167.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Krauss R and Fussell S, Mutual knowledge and communicative effectiveness, Intellectual teamwork: The social and technological bases of cooperative work, Eds. by Galegher J, Kraut R E, and Egido C, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1990.

  19. Clark H H and Carlson T, Hearers and speech acts, Language, 1982, 2: 2–332.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Clark H H and Marshall C R, Definite reference and mutual knowledge, Eds. by Joshi A K, Webber B, and Sag I A, Elements of discourse understanding, Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 1981.

  21. Cramton C, The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration, Organization Science, 2001, 12(3): 346–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Barr D J, Establishing conventional communication systems: Is common knowledge necessary? Cognitive Science, 2004, 28: 28–937.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Benchekroun H, Modélisation des mécanismes d’interlocution, Thèse de doctorat, CNAM, Paris, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Dugdale J, Bellamine Ben Saoud N, Pavard B, et al., Simulation and emergency management. Information Systems for Emergency Management, Eds. by Van de Walle B, Turoff M, and Starr Roxanne Hiltz S. Advances in Management Information Systems. Vladimir Swass Series Editor, 2008.

  25. Repast Suite, http://repast.sourceforge.net/.

  26. Pajek, http://pajek.imfm.si/doku.php.

  27. R software, http://www.r-project.org/.

  28. Erdos P and Renyi A, On random graphs. I. Publicationes Mathematicae, 1959, 6: 6–290.

  29. Grice P, Logic and conversation, J. Syntax and Semantics, 1975, 41–58.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Université Grenoble Alpes, LIG, Grenoble, France

    Julie Dugdale

  2. University of Agder, Agder, Norway

    Julie Dugdale

  3. Ecole Nationale des Sciences de l’Informatique, Laboratoire RIADI, Université de La Manouba, Manouba, Tunisia

    Narjès Bellamine Ben Saoud & Fedia Zouai

  4. CNRS, IRIT, Université P. Sabatier, Toulouse, France

    Bernard Pavard

Authors
  1. Julie Dugdale
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Narjès Bellamine Ben Saoud
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fedia Zouai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Bernard Pavard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Julie Dugdale.

Additional information

This paper was recommended for publication by Editor DI Zengru.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dugdale, J., Bellamine Ben Saoud, N., Zouai, F. et al. Coupling agent based simulation with dynamic networks analysis to study the emergence of mutual knowledge as a percolation phenomenon. J Syst Sci Complex 29, 1358–1381 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11424-016-4298-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11424-016-4298-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation