Simulating the Emergence of Complex Cultural Beliefs

  • M. Afzal Upal
  • Rik Warren
Conference paper
Part of the Agent-Based Social Systems book series (ABSS, volume 6)


This paper describes the architecture of a multiagent society designed to model the dynamics of cultural knowledge. It argues that knowledge-rich agent-based social simulations are needed to understand and model the cultural dynamics of natural and artificial societies. The methodology is illustrated with the help of the Multiagent Wumpus World (MWW) testbed in which agents (1) have a causal model of the environment, (2) are goal-directed, and (3) can communicate and share information. We also present results of experiments conducted using a version of MWW. One results is the emergence of the Pareto 80/20 principle in which the 20% most communicative agents account for 80% of all communications.


Causal Model Cultural Knowledge World Model Cultural Dynamic Shared Belief 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Alchourrn, C., Grdenfors, P., & Makinson, D.: On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions. J. Symbolic Logic, 50, 510–530, 1985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Allen, J.: Natural Language Understanding. Menlo Park, CA: Benjamin Cummings (1987).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bainbridge, W.: Neural Network Models of Religious Belief. Sociological Perspectives, 38, 483–495, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bainbridge, W., & Stark, R.: A Theory of Religion. New York: Lang (1987).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barabasi, A. L.: Linked: How everything is connected to everything else and what it means for business, science, and everyday life. Basic Books (2003).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chiu, C. & Hong, Y.: Social Psychology of Culture. Psychology Press, New York (2006).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Doran, J. (1998). Simulating collective misbeliefs. J. Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 1(1).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Epstein, J.: Learning to be thoughtless: Social norms and individual computation. Computational Economics, 18(1), 9–24, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gabriel, W.: The influentials: People who influence people. Albany: State University of New York Press (1994).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gibson, J.J.: The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin (1979).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gupta, N., & Nau, D.S.: On the complexity of blocks-world planning. Artificial Intelligence, 56(2–3), 223–254, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 13.
    Russell, S., & Norvig, P.: Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall (2003).Google Scholar
  13. 14.
    Schelling, T.: Dynamic models of segregation. J. Mathematical Sociology, 1, 143–186 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 15.
    Smith, L.: Sects and Death in the Middle East. The Weekly Standard, (2006).Google Scholar
  15. 16.
    Upal, M. A.: The structure of false social beliefs, in Proceedings of the First IEEE International Symposium on Artificial Life, 282–286, Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Press (2007).Google Scholar
  16. 17.
    Upal, M.A., & Sama, R.: Effect of Communication on the Distribution of False Social Beliefs, in Proceedings of the International Conference on Cognitive Modeling.Google Scholar
  17. 18.
    Upal, M.A., & Sun, R.: Cognitive Modeling and Agent-based Social Simulation: Papers from the AAAI-06 Workshop (ISBN 978-1-57735-284-6), Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press (2006).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Afzal Upal
    • 1
  • Rik Warren
    • 2
  1. 1.Cognitive ScienceOccidental CollegeLos AngelesUSA
  2. 2.U.S. Air Force Research LaboratoryWright-Patterson AFBOhioUSA

Personalised recommendations