: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 9:40 PM
To: s...@synapse9.com; The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Classification of ABM's
Phil Henshaw wrote:
Owen,
You say:
Clip...
I'm sure you don't mean to put yourself in the same class as Emmy
Noether, right? She's
Owen,
You say:
Clip...
I'm sure you don't mean to put yourself in the same class as Emmy
Noether, right? She's of the same historic stature as most of the
early 1900's best scientists, and her symmetry discoveries surely
should have won her a Nobel.
[ph] Well, equally, I'm sure you don't
Phil Henshaw wrote:
Owen,
You say:
Clip...
I'm sure you don't mean to put yourself in the same class as Emmy
Noether, right? She's of the same historic stature as most of the
early 1900's best scientists, and her symmetry discoveries surely
should have won her a Nobel.
] *On
Behalf Of *Steve Smith
*Sent:* Sunday, January 04, 2009 10:44 PM
*To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
*Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Classification of ABM's
Doug -
On the other hand, top (top, top, top) level views which result in such
profound observations such as
- Order
...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 6:44 AM
To: s...@synapse9.com; The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Classification of ABM's
Phil,
your statement in bold below peaked my interest because there seems to be a
tenuous analogy with symmetry
On Jan 6, 2009, at 7:24 AM, Phil Henshaw wrote:
Saul,
On first glance it appears that Noether's theorem is quite similar
to mine,
but just does not take it to the next level.
I'm sure you don't mean to put yourself in the same class as Emmy
Noether, right? She's of the same historic
lied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Classification of ABM's
Jim,
I cheerfully concede that one is free to view the universe or any of
its subcomponents through an astoundingly large variety of frames of
reference (FOR). Whichever FOR best gets a person throug
--
Ann Racuya-Robbins
Founder and CEO World Knowledge Bank www.wkbank.com[1]
Steve, I welcome your call for a panel conversation. I would be
happy to join such a panel and will bring all that I can to the
conversation. While I think a moderator could be useful it may not be
Douglas Roberts wrote:
There are many alternative simulation styles to an ABM simulation
architecture:
* Discrete-event queuing models
* Continuous systems simulation (ex: CSMP)
* Procedural discrete event (ex: SimSCRIPT)
* CA
The use (or not) of a subroutine in the underlying
Thus spake Steve Smith circa 01/04/2009 03:27 PM:
Taxonomies are most useful (IMO) to those who are (as you point out with Doug
as
teacher of ABM 101) entering a field naive, or who are trying to understand
something forest-ey rather than tree-ey.
I suppose I disagree slightly with both
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Classification of ABM's
Jim,
I cheerfully concede that one is free to view the universe or any of its
subcomponents through an astoundingly large variety of frames of reference
(FOR). Whichever FOR best gets a person through
?
From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of
Douglas Roberts [d...@parrot-farm.net]
Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 2:16 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Classification of ABM's
Jim,
I cheerfully concede that one
Thus spake John Kennison circa 05/01/09 08:34 AM:
Perhaps the first step in forming a taxonomy is to see if there is a
reasonable way to distinguish ABMs from non-ABMs. I am guessing here,
but is using a subroutine the alternative to using an ABM? (For
example, is it the case that a subroutine
Smith
Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 10:44 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Classification of ABM's
Doug -
On the other hand, top (top, top, top) level views which result in such
profound observations such as
* Order matters
Phylogenetic trees and cladistics are useful to
understand any evolutionary or complex adaptive
system. I am not sure if a phylogenetic tree for
ABMs itself makes sense. Of course we can try
to categorize them by a taxonomy. On the
NetLogo models pages we find the following
categories:
* Art
I'm afraid taxonomy, mentally encapsulated or otherwise, has little to do
with the way I develop an ABM, Nick. Rather, good software engineering
practices provide the tools for success. CMMI provides a reasonable
software engineering methodology that emphasizes feedback between the
following
/2009 11:16:21 AM
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Classification of ABM's
I'm afraid taxonomy, mentally encapsulated or otherwise, has little to do with
the way I develop an ABM, Nick. Rather, good software engineering practices
provide the tools for success. CMMI provides a reasonable software
; The Friday Morning Applied Complexity
Coffee Group friam@redfish.com
Date: 1/4/2009 8:57:28 AM
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Classification of ABM's
AHA! you DO have a taxonomy.
To pile on here (I suspect Doug can take it):
Doug, after you set up the straw man that there was no taxonomy
possible
Morning Applied Complexity
Coffee Group friam@redfish.com
Date: 1/4/2009 8:57:28 AM
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Classification of ABM's
AHA! you DO have a taxonomy.
To pile on here (I suspect Doug can take it):
Doug, after you set up the straw man that there was no taxonomy
possible, you
Steverino,
I guess it depends on what your definitions of trees vs. forests are, as
pertains to my particular interest areas.
In order to develop a viable set of requirements for any given simulation
project, one must be able to perceive the top level view, as well as being
capable of
Doug -
On the other hand, top (top, top, top) level views which result in such
profound observations such as
Order matters, or
Complexity is, or
Taxonomies exist
rarely hold much interest for me, unless they make the job of designing
functional complex systems easier.
Steve(orino)
I find it interesting that we are having this conversation while comfortably
seated about 16 minutes from each
Doug-
Steve(orino)
I find it interesting that we are having this conversation while
comfortably seated about
16 minutes from each other, and all the rest of FRIAM remains
thuddingly silent. Do you suppose we said something to offend them?
No, we just like the sounds of our own
Ditto here, except it's a 200+ year old kiva fireplace. We should have a
FRIAM neighborhood toddy fest before too much more time goes by.
Welcome to the group, Jack.
Cheers,
--Doug (noeeno)
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Steve Smith sasm...@swcp.com wrote:
Doug-
Steve(orino)
I find it
Thaniks everybody. Interesting responses.
Doug, I cannot shake the intuition that the reason you cannot see value of
the taxonmy is that you already have one in your head that makes writing
one down unnecessary. I am not sure quite what that means, let alone how I
would show it to you.
But
25 matches
Mail list logo
