Re: [Swarm-Modelling] GEPR on life-cycle requirements

[glen e. p. ropella]

Daniel Calhoun wrote:
> I speak as someone who worked with both Swarm and Repast, several years
> ago, to do ethnohistorical models of trade and band-survival patterns in
> a plains-like environment.  To make this increasingly interesting would
> have required modelling something like speciation or ethnogenesis.  John
> Holland never really produced this.  For that reason, the rhetoric of
> GEPR's analogies is enticing.  It actually hints at producing emergent
> species that are not encompassed by (that is, in the ugly word, "built
> in by") a naive pre-specification of the outcome.  Like a novel species
> among the fish in a modelled stream.
>  
> Perhaps a more careful analogy would keep things within bounds.

It might.  What bounds are you talking about?  My goal with this
discussion is to establish the requirements in and around ontogeny or
evolution (not necessarily biological)   So, it would be a very good
thing to proscribe the domain, showing where the practical boundaries are.

Can you provide a more careful analogy?

-- 
glen e. p. ropella, 971-219-3846, http://tempusdictum.com
Many people would sooner die than think; In fact, they do so. --
Bertrand Russell