110 likes | 225 Views
EIASM Academic Council meeting discussing Complexity Education and Training to improve companies' knowledge in complex systems concepts. Topics include case studies, innovation, tools for problem-solving, and importance of models. Models as conceptual tools for addressing unknown problems. Constraints from theory on agent and artifact transformations. Agents' intentionality and coevolution with artifacts. Effects of agent heterogeneity on innovation. Optimal innovation balance for system performance.
E N D
EIASM Academic Council Meeting Roberto Serra Modena and Reggio Emilia University
CETRA: Complexity Education and TRAining • A EU-Leonardo project • To improve the knowledge of companies (and in particular SME’s) in complex systems concepts and applications • Case studies • Complexity and innovation • Guidelines for courses and curricula • Development and test of selected modules EIASM AC Meeting
Self organization emergent properties Description levels Reciprocal causality Positive feedback Path dependency Frozen accidents Networks Tangled hierarchies Self-similarity Universality Adaptation and exaptation Coevolution Edge of chaos Redundancy and degeneracy Key concepts selected in Cetra EIASM AC Meeting
The importance of models • Dynamical models • Cellular automata • Agent-based models • Genetic algorithms • Genetic programming • Genetic networks • ... EIASM AC Meeting
Tools to solve well-defined technical problems EU-Esprit projects Caboto and Colombo: in-situ bioremediation of contaminated soils. Scale-up from pilot plant to the field (cellular automata model) EIASM AC Meeting
Models as conceptual tools to address largely unknown problems • Example: innovation (requires analysis at different levels!) • EU-FET project Iscom (Information Society as a COMplex system) • Modena and Reggio Emilia University (I) • Universitè Paris La Sorbonne (F) • CNRS, Paris (F) • Imperial College (UK) • Models allow us to bridge the gap from a micro-theory to its consequences at a macro-level EIASM AC Meeting
Constraints from the theory • transformations occur both in agent and artifact space • => Agents and artifacts are both important • Innovation leads to modifications of the role of agents as well as of the meaning of artifacts • => both must be endogeneously generated • External fitness functions cannot be used here • Directedness (both in artifact and in agent space) • => agents have intentionality EIASM AC Meeting
outline of the model • agents use artifacts, produced by other agents, to build other artifacts • Using suitable recipes • Presently, artifacts are represented as numbers and recipes as operators • which can be “sold” to yet other agents, or to an “external world” • agents and artifacts coevolve in order to better exploit the opportunities of their mutual relationships and of the “external” world • the meaning of artifacts is defined by which agents use them, and for what • the role of agents is defined by what they do, and by the other agents with which they interact • Agents can innovate: they identify a new artifact as their goal and try to build the corresponding recipe EIASM AC Meeting
Example: heterogeneity • What are the effects of the agent heterogenity? • We can consider different styles of innovation • Innovation rate • Jump frequency and range • Jump identifies an attempt to build something really different from the existent • Homogeneous vs heterogeneous systems EIASM AC Meeting
In general, frequent innovators perform better than the others • But a world populated only by large jumpers is very fragile • On the other hand, innovation is very slow in a world populated by small jumpers only • The best results are achieved in the case where both types coexist • A result which was not obvious a priori – it shows that the theory can account for this phenomenon! EIASM AC Meeting
Network of artifact types t=350 initial EIASM AC Meeting t=4000