Modelling Dynamic Normative Understanding in Agent Societies

  • Christopher K. Frantz
  • Martin K. Purvis
  • Bastin Tony Roy Savarimuthu
  • Mariusz Nowostawski
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8861)


Agent-based Modelling offers strong prospects in the context of institutional modelling, which, from historical perspective, centres around the question of how far institutional instruments might have affected social and economic outcomes. To provide a richer representation of the institution formation process in the context of social simulation, we propose a norm generalisation process that uses an extended version of Crawford and Ostrom’s institutional grammar and incorporates aspects from the area of social psychology. We believe that this approach offers a good compromise between generalisability and modelling detail. We briefly showcase this approach in the context of a scenario from the area of institutional economics to highlight its explanatory power.


Norms Institutions Institutional Grammar Norm Generalisation Norm Synthesis Dynamic Deontics Maghribi Traders Coalition Social Simulation Agent-Based Modelling 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Andrighetto, G., Villatoro, D., Conte, R.: Norm internalization in artificial societies. AI Commun. 23(4), 325–339 (2010)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bandura, A., Ross, D., Ross, S.A.: Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models. J. of Abnormal and Social Psychology 63(3), 575–582 (1961)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Crawford, S.E., Ostrom, E.: A Grammar of Institutions. In: Understanding Institutional Diversity, ch. 5, pp. 137–174. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Decety, J., Grèzes, J.: The power of simulation: imagining one’s own and other’s behavior. Brain Research 1079(1), 4–14 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Frantz, C.: Video of Evolving Normative Understanding based on Dynamic Deontics, (accessed: September 2014)
  6. 6.
    Frantz, C., Purvis, M.K., Nowostawski, M., Savarimuthu, B.T.R.: nADICO: A Nested Grammar of Institutions. In: Boella, G., Elkind, E., Savarimuthu, B.T.R., Dignum, F., Purvis, M.K. (eds.) PRIMA 2013. LNCS, vol. 8291, pp. 429–436. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Frantz, C., Purvis, M.K., Nowostawski, M., Savarimuthu, B.T.R.: Modelling Institutions Using Dynamic Deontics. In: Balke, T., Dignum, F., van Riemsdijk, M.B., Chopra, A.K. (eds.) COIN 2013. LNCS, vol. 8386, pp. 211–233. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ghorbani, A., Aldewereld, H., Dignum, V., Noriega, P.: Shared Strategies in Artificial Agent Societies. In: Aldewereld, H., Sichman, J.S. (eds.) COIN 2012. LNCS, vol. 7756, pp. 71–86. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ghorbani, A., Bots, P., Dignum, V., Dijkema, G.: MAIA: a Framework for Developing Agent-Based Social Simulations. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 16(2) (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Greenwald, A.G., Banaji, M.R.: Implicit social cognition: attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review 102, 4–27 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Greif, A.: Institutions and the Path to the Modern Economy. Cambridge University Press, New York (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Haslam, S.A., Ellemers, N., Reicher, S.D., Reynolds, K.J., Schmitt, M.T.: The social identity perspective today: An overview of its defining ideas. In: Postmes, T., Branscombe, N.R. (eds.) Rediscovering Social Identity, pp. 341–356. Psychology Press (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Morales, J., Lopez-Sanchez, M., Rodriguez-Aguilar, J.A., Wooldridge, M., Vasconcelos, W.: Automated synthesis of normative systems. In: AAMAS 2013 (2013)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Morales, J., Lopez-Sanchez, M., Rodriguez-Aguilar, J.A., Wooldridge, M., Vasconcelos, W.: Minimality and simplicity in the automated synthesis of normative systems. In: AAMAS (2014)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    North, D.C.: Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Parsons, T.: The Social System. Routledge, New York (1951)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Riveret, R., Artikis, A., Busquets, D., Pitt, J.: Self-governance by transfiguration: From learning to prescriptions. In: Cariani, F., Grossi, D., Meheus, J., Parent, X. (eds.) DEON 2014. LNCS, vol. 8554, pp. 177–191. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Siddiki, S., Weible, C.M., Basurto, X., Calanni, J.: Dissecting Policy Designs: An Application of the Institutional Grammar Tool. The Policy Studies Journal 39, 79–103 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Smajgl, A., Izquierdo, L.R., Huigen, M.: Modeling endogenous rule changes in an institutional context: The ADICO Sequence. Advances in Complex Systems 2(11), 199–215 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Villatoro, D., Andrighetto, G., Sabater-Mir, J., Conte, R.: Dynamic sanctioning for robust and cost-efficient norm compliance. In: IJCAI 2011, vol. 1, pp. 414–419. AAAI Press (2011)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Williamson, O.E.: Markets and Hierarchies, Analysis and Antitrust Implications: A Study in the Economics of Internal Organization. Free Press, New York (1975)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Williamson, O.E.: Transaction Cost Economics: How it works; Where it is headed. De Economist 146(1), 23–58 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher K. Frantz
    • 1
  • Martin K. Purvis
    • 1
  • Bastin Tony Roy Savarimuthu
    • 1
  • Mariusz Nowostawski
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Information ScienceUniversity of OtagoNew Zealand
  2. 2.Faculty of Computer Science and Media TechnologyGjøvik University CollegeNorway

Personalised recommendations