CFP: Workshop on Model-2-Model

From: Bruce Edmonds (
Date: Wed May 22 2002 - 13:28:17 BST

  • Next message: Lawrence DeBivort: "RE: Boom! and you go to Heaven"

    Received: by id NAA23610 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Wed, 22 May 2002 13:31:38 +0100
    Message-ID: <>
    Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 13:28:17 +0100
    From: Bruce Edmonds <>
    Organization: Centre for Policy Modelling
    X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (WinNT; U)
    X-Accept-Language: en
    Subject: CFP: Workshop on Model-2-Model
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
    Apparently-To: <>
    Apparently-To: <>
    Precedence: bulk

    A Call for Papers for:

                       "Model to Model"

                          A Workshop
       31st March - 1st April 2003 in Marseille, France

           Submission Dead line: 1st November 2002

    In recent years there has been an explosion of published literature
    utilising Multi-Agent-Based Simulation (MABS) to study social,
    biological and artificial systems. However, despite the plethora of
    novel models and interesting results it is rare that models are
    compared, built-on or transferred between researchers. It would seem
    there is a dearth of "model-to-model" analysis.

    The aim of this workshop is to gather researchers in MABS who are
    interested in understanding and furthering the transferability of
    knowledge between models and beyond. Although models tend to give very
    seductive results, it is not always clear how people who are not the
    modeller can interpret or utilise such results - particularly when
    building their own models.

    Understanding complex systems often seems to necessitate the use of more
    than one model. This might be for several different reasons, for
    example: different models at varying levels of abstraction might be used
    for different purposes. By specifically comparing models a better view
    of what modelling brings to the understanding of (real and artificial)
    societies may be facilitated.

    Comparison of models can be achieved by diverse means that have been
    commonly used by researchers to attain validation or to get a better
    understanding of others' work, for example:

    Rewriting models that others have described in papers
          so as to understand them more deeply and reproduce
          the stated results (Axelrod, 1997);
    Composition of models where different scales are
          inter-related in a larger model - the results of one
          model being used in the other;
    Comparison of different models that announce the same
          type of results and trying to see if they actually
          produce similar (or the same) results - sometimes
          termed "aligning" of models (Axtell et al., 1996);
    Comparison of different models based on their fitness
          to a set of data;
    Using one model as a post-hoc summary or abstraction
          of another model's results; Constraining the scope
          of an existing model to enable more powerful
          techniques to be applied in a different
          computational framework;
    Using models with different structures and
          assumptions to confirm each other's results;
    Determining what to do when two models give results
          that contradict each other.

    Workshop papers must be based on some comparison of models, as described
    above. Papers should therefore deal with at least two agent based
    simulation models (with at least one of them already published). The
    relationships between the models should be central to the paper and
    covered in detail. The models should be presented in enough detail to
    allow for the reader to understand the comparative element. Ideally any
    new models should be described in sufficient detail for others to be
    able to reimplement them. Given these criteria papers may be technical
    or theoretical.

    Axelrod R., 1997, Advancing the Art of Simulation in the Social
    Sciences, R. Conte and R. Hegselmann and P. Terna (eds) Simulating
    Social Phenomena, Springer-Verlag. Selected Papers TBA, Berlin, pp

    Axtell, R., Axelrod R., J.M. Epstein and M.D. Cohen (1996), "Aligning
    Simulation Models: A Case Study and Results", Computational and
    Mathematical Organization Theory 1(2), pp. 123-141.

    Moss S., 2000, Canonical Task Environments for Social Simulation,
    Computational and Mathematical Organisation Theory, Vol. 6, No. 3,
    September 2000, pp 249-275.

    The workshop should be held on 31. march - 1st April 2003 in Marseille,

    Please send your paper(s) before the 1st november 2002 to:

    Organisation committee:
    Bruce Edmonds (Centre for Policy Modelling, Manchester, UK)
    David Hales (Centre for Policy Modelling, Manchester, UK)
    Juliette Rouchier (GREQAM-CNRS, Marseille, France)

    Program committee: Rob Axtell, Francois Bousquet, Helder Coelho, Paul
    Davidsson, Marco Janssen, Catholijn Jonker, Christophe Lepage, Scott
    Moss, and Mario Paolucci


    Bruce Edmonds,
    Centre for Policy Modelling,
    Manchester Metropolitan University, Aytoun Bldg.,
    Aytoun St., Manchester, M1 3GH. UK.
    Tel: +44 161 247 6479 Fax: +44 161 247 6802
    Email: Web:

    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 22 2002 - 13:43:44 BST