Advertisement

Modeling Endogenous Coordination Using a Dynamic Language*

  • Jonathan Ozik
  • Michael North
Part of the Agent-Based Social Systems book series (ABSS, volume 7)

Abstract

Dynamic languages are computer languages that allow programs to substantially restructure themselves while they are running. Interest in these kinds of programming languages has dramatically increased in the last few years. This paper builds on previous work by exploring the use of a popular dynamic language, namely Groovy, within the Repast Simphony (Repast S) platform. This language is applied to modeling the endogenous emergence of coordination within a group of social agents. This paper introduces the Endogenous Emergence of Coordination (EndEC) model. It then highlights many of the features in Groovy that were found to be particularly helpful during model implementation. This demonstrates the powerful and flexible capabilities that a dynamic language can bring to the creation of agent-based models. What is particularly exciting is the potential for creating truly dynamic and evolving open-ended simulations, where the simulation ­fundamentally changes as it executes.

Keywords

Dynamic language Endogenous Coordination Emergence Agent-based modeling 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers who offered helpful ­comments and suggestions. UChicago Argonne, under US Department of Energy contract DE-AC-02- 06CH11357 supported this work.

References

  1. 1.
    Apple (2007) The objective-C programming languageGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Groovy Website (2009) Available at: http://groovy.codehaus.org/
  3. 3.
    Ke J, Holland JH (2006) Language origin from an emergentist perspective. Appl Ling 27:691–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    König D, Glover A, King P, Laforge G, Skeet J (2007) Groovy in action. Manning Publications, GreenwichGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Minar N, Burkhart R, Langton C, Askenazi M (1996) The swarm simulation system: a toolkit for building multi-agent simulations. In: Santa Fe Institute Working Paper 96-06-042Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    North MJ, Howe TR, Collier NT, Vos JR (2005) The repast simphony development environment. In: Macal CM, North MJ, Sallach DL (eds) Proceedings of the agent 2005 conference on generative social processes, models, and mechanisms, Chicago, IL, USA, 13–15 Oct 2005Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    North MJ, Howe TR, Collier NT, Vos JR (2005) The repast simphony runtime system. In: Macal CM, North MJ, Sallach DL (eds) Proceedings of the agent 2005 conference on generative social processes, models, and mechanisms, Chicago, IL, USA, 13–15 Oct 2005Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ozik J, North MJ (2008) Agent-based modeling with a dynamic language: platform support for modeling endogenous coordination. In: Proceedings of the second world congress on social simulation, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA USAGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ozik J, North MJ, Sallach DL, Panici JW (2007) ROAD map: transforming and extending repast with groovy. In: Macal CM, North MJ, Sallach DL (eds) Proceedings of the agent 2007 conference on complex interaction and social emergence, Evanston, IL, USA, 15–17 Nov 2007Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    ROAD, Repast, Repast Organization for Architecture and Design Home Page, Chicago, IL USA (2008). Available at: http://repast.sourceforge.net
  11. 11.
    Steckler PA, Wand M (1997) Lightweight closure conversion. ACM Trans Program Lang Syst 19(1):48–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Swarm Development Group (2008) SDG home page. Available at: http://www.swarm.org/
  13. 13.
    Tao G, Minett JW, Jinyun K, Holland JH, Wang WSY (2005) Coevolution of lexicon and syntax from a simulation perspective: research articles. Complex 10:50–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Argonne National LaboratoryArgonneUSA
  2. 2.University of ChicagoChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations