Advertisement

Elements of a theory of simulation

  • Steen Rasmussen
  • Christopher L. Barrett
4. Artificial Worlds
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 929)

Abstract

Artificial Life and the more general area of Complex Systems does not have a unified theoretical framework although most theoretical work in these areas is based on simulation. This is primarily due to an insufficient representational power of the classical mathematical frameworks for the description of discrete dynamical systems of interacting objects with often complex internal states.

Unlike computation or the numerical analysis of differential equations, simulation does not have a well established conceptual and mathematical foundation. Simulation is an arguable unique union of modeling and computation. However, simulation also qualifies as a separate species of system representation with its own motivations, characteristics, and implications. This work outlines how simulation can be rooted in mathematics and shows which properties some of the elements of such a mathematical framework has.

The properties of simulation are described and analyzed in terms of properties of dynamical systems. It is shown how and why a simulation produces emergent behavior and why the analysis of the dynamics of the system being simulated always is an analysis of emergent phenomena. Indeed, the single fundamental class of properties of the natural world that simulation will open to new understanding, is that which occurs only in the dynamics produced by the interactions of the components of complex systems. Simulation offers a synthetic, formal framework for the experimental mathematics of representation and analysis of complex dynamical systems.

A notion of a universal simulator and the definition of simulatability is proposed. This allows a description of conditions under which simulations can distribute update functions over system components, thereby determining simulatability. The connection between the notion of simulatability and the notion of computability is defined and the concepts are distinguished. The basis of practical detection methods for determining effectively non-simulatable systems in practice is presented.

The conceptual framework is illustrated through examples from molecular self-assembly end engineering.

Keywords

simulatability computability dynamics emergence system representation universal simulator 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    N.A. Baas. Emergence, hierarchies and hyperstructures. Artificial Life III, proceedings, ed. C.G. Langton, Santa Fe Institute Studies in the Sciences of Complexity /Addison-Wesley, New York, XVII:515–537, 1994.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    L. Blum. Lectures on a theory of computation and complexity over the reals (or an arbitrary ring). Lectures in Complex Systems, SFI Studies in the Sciences of Complexity/ Addison-Wesley, New York, II:1–47, 1989.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    L. Blum, M. Shub, and S. Smale. On the theory of computation and complexity over the real numbers: Np completness, recursive functions and universal machines. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc, 21(1):1–46, 1989.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    U. Frisch, B. Hasslacher, and Y. Pomeau. Lattice-gas automata for the navierstokes equation. Physical Review Letters, Vol 56:1505–1508, 1986.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    B. Hasslacher. Discrete fluids. Los Alamos Science, Special Issue (15):175–217, 1987.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    D.R. Jefferson. Virtual time. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, Vol 7, No. 3:404–425, 1985.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    B. Lubachevsky and A.Weiss. An analysis of rollback-based simulation. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, Vol. 1, No. 2:154–193, 1991.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    B.B. Mandelbrot. The fractal geometry of nature. W.H. Freeman, New York, 1983.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    K. Nagel and S. Rasmussen. Traffic at the edge of chaos. Artificial Life IV, proceedings, eds. R.A. Brooks and P. Maes/MIT Press, Cambridge Massachusetts, pages 222–235, 1994.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    C.H. Papadimitriou. Computational Complexity. Addison-Wesley, 1994.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    S. Rasmussen and J.R. Smith. Lattice polymer automata. Ber. Bunsengs. Phys. Chem., 98 (No. 3):1185–1193, 1994.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Steen Rasmussen
    • 1
    • 2
  • Christopher L. Barrett
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Los Alamos National LaboratoryLos AlamosUSA
  2. 2.Santa Fe InstituteSanta FeUSA

Personalised recommendations