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

[Daniel Calhoun]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "glen e. p. ropella" <address@hidden>
To: "Agent-based modeling" <address@hidden>
Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2006 11:11 AM
Subject: Re: [Swarm-Modelling] GEPR on life-cycle requirements


If there's a modeling requirement
> that isn't being met by the ABM packages, then _progress_ is defined
> according to that unmet requirement.
>
> I haven't read "The Cheyenne Nation" either.  Is it possible for someone
> who has read it to lay out the modeling requirements it might imply?

I hope it is possible.  I once mined Moore mercilessly for real-history 
parameters to use in a trade-and-warfare models of band (not individuals) as 
agents.  I didn't feel I had biassed when it produced something like the 
Rocky Mountain rendezvous systems, and in a plausible "time" frame.  But 
that is a no-brainer, something like showing that it does not  take much 
bias in residence choices to produce a segregation pattern.  Anything 
different would be the oddity

But I put all that to one side in order to go back to some writing.  Now, I 
have thought about resuming the model.  The ethnogenesis question is more 
interesting, more difficult, and challenging. In many things, that kind of 
resumption is chancy.  And it turns out that Swarm and Repast are now moving 
targets.  True, there are now better instructional materials for Objective C 
(if one wants to translate from the Cocoa).  But drang nach innovation runs 
strong . . .

Daniel Calhoun
address@hidden