Hope this helps. There is a formal specification framework that has the flavor you are looking for.
It's called abstract state machines, and has several executable implementations (AsmL, CoreASM and several others). There's been some work (Uwe Glaesser at Simon Fraser) on applying it to social simulations (mainly computational criminology). During the pre-migration period of CCS-5 some people seemed to think that it was a promising approach for formally specifying the simulations they were dealing with. I don't know, however, if anything came out of this. There is a crucial requirement on your list missing from the ASM definition, though: the "first-class" part. To have that you would have to modify the formal definition of ASM. How to do it properly is not entirely trivial. Well, let's say I hope to complete a paper doing that in a not too distant future :). As for executable implementations ... Best, Gabi On 8/23/09, Douglas Roberts <[email protected]> wrote: > About a million years ago, we developed an agent-based model (except that in > 1986 we called them Actor-based models) that did just this. It was a C^3I > (Command, Control, Communication, and Intel) military simulation in which > battalion-sized organizations would deploy in a rad-war environment. the > simulation had reconnaissance agents, commander agents, fuelers, and > communications. It was implemented in KEE (Knowledge Engineering > Environment), a LISP-base AI shell. The decision logic was implemented in > KEE's rule system. It did not create new rules, but it could disable or > modify existing ones. > > The simulation updated it's state, operating on perceived knowledge about > the state of the terrain it was traversing and updating that with "ground > truth" when such became available. The project was called "The Mobile > Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (MICBM) simulation". Remnants of it can > still be found by googling: > > http://www.osti.gov/bridge/product.biblio.jsp?query_id=0&page=0&osti_id=6940830 > > If you go here it will cost you $17 to read all about it: > > http://www.ntis.gov/search/product.aspx?ABBR=DE87003741 > > --Doug > > -- > Doug Roberts > [email protected] > [email protected] > 505-455-7333 - Office > 505-670-8195 - Cell > > On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 9:13 PM, Russ Abbott <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I'm interesting in developing a model that uses rule-driven agents. I >> would >> like the agent rules to be condition-action rules, i.e., similar to the >> sorts of rules one finds in forward chaining blackboard systems. In >> addition, I would like both the agents and the rules themselves to be >> first >> class objects. In other words, the rules should be able: >> >> - to refer to agents, >> - to create and destroy agents, >> - to create new rules for newly created agents, >> - to disable rules for existing agents, and >> - to modify existing rules for existing agents. >> >> Does anyone know of a system like that? >> >> -- Russ >> >> ============================================================ >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >> lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org >> > ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
