On Sep 25, 2006, at 4:55 PM, Günther Greindl wrote: > I would need it to model cultural diffusion processes, my approach > stems from viewing human societies as complex adaptive systems > and special interest will be invested in modeling the cultural > processes > (either with cognitive agents, or "memetic" data structures or > something > in that direction). > > A good starting point seems to me the sugarscape model (I also want > to include resources and competition between the agents). > The agents should be adaptive in the long run (read: learning > ability) - > although this goes somewhat contrary to the keep it simple paradigm. I'm just about to release my source code (refreshing it for MASON 11 and doing general cleanup/commenting) and you'll be welcome to look at or use it. I implemented 70-75% of the rules and outcomes in Growing Artificial Societies. I believe Repast's Sugarscape has only 2 or 3 rules as a 'proof of concept', but I didn't look closely to see easily one might grow the source code base with additional rules. I've not implemented anything in Repast so I can't make any direct comments about it. Since both MASON and Repast are general- purpose agent modeling and simulation toolkits, I find it hard to believe that one would be significantly better than the other for social phenomena per se. Once the parameter space and number of agents reach certain levels, performance starts to matter. I was able to make informed decisions about which MASON data structures and classes to use based on the Javadoc, tutorials, and consulting the core design team [a bunch of times]. Any kind of complex cognitive architecture will fly against the philosophy of Sugarscape, but is interesting that the agents have no overt memory to use in reasoning/(ir)rational decision making. The most complex and adaptive cognitive capabilities are the welfare estimation equations--which are tied to culture/cultural preferences in one set of rules/outcomes. I think this comes closest to your desire to model adaptive agents and cultural diffusion. The authors argue that they were after sufficiency in terms of simple rules generating complex phenomena. As agents/models become more complex they will become more difficult to understand and in turn establishing causality between code and simulation outcomes. Given the very little replication that has occurred in this field, in general, there are many open questions. Tony Bigbee