ALiCE: ISIS
Lab: Tu/Th 10:05 - 12:55 |
Nicholas Gessler Computer Models of Cultural Evolution |
|||||||||||||||
"It's
not rocket science, but then, what is?" |
||||||||||||||||
The
Use of Complexity Science "The challenges of the 21st century will require new ways of thinking about and understanding the complex, interconnected and rapidly changing world in which we live and work. And the new field of complexity science is providing the insights we need to push our thinking in new directions." |
||||||||||||||||
SYLLABUS (subject to changes) |
||||||||||||||||
"A New Way of Knowing," Human Complex
Systems Program Commencement Address. In Donald Rumsfeld's controversial career, one statement of his stands out as an admonition against simplistic plans and idealized expectations: "There are known knowns. These are things
we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things
that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things
we don't know we don't know." Perhaps, one of these "unknown unknowns" for Donald Rumsfeld was complexity. Perhaps, he didn't know that he didn't know the importance of the complex variety of perceptions, beliefs, goals, plans and actions in the world of social and cultural affairs. For us, in the Human Complex Systems program, social and cultural complexity is a "known unknown." It is the focus of our work. We know that we don't know the often counter-intuitive processes at work in society and culture, processes that interact and co-evolve in a dynamically ever-changing world. It is this complex network of causes and effects that we seek to describe, to understand and to explain in our Human Complex Systems Minor. For us, complexity is a "known unknown," an unknown that was once thought to be unknowable. The U.S. Department of Education writes: "The challenges of the 21st century will require new ways of thinking about and understanding the complex, interconnected and rapidly changing world in which we live and work. And the new field of complexity science is providing the insights we need to push our thinking in new directions." A Report of the U.S. Department of Education Much of complexity science arose from the general discovery of computation in the natural world around us, and the specific quest to build machines, computers, on which to simulate these multi-agent systems. As the power of consumer-off-the-shelf computers has grown, as the languages that we use to talk to computers have become more available, and as both have declined in cost, the desktop computer has become the instrument of choice for exploring our own ideas through simulations written by our own hand. No longer must we exclusively rely on someone else's programmed applications; we can write our own. No longer must we passively accept vague verbal arguments pretending to tell us how the complex world works; we can translate those into would-be worlds. Now, albeit with unrelenting effort, we can build artificial worlds, artificial societies and artificial cultures on our own. We can experiment with the theories and hypotheses they embody on desktop laboratories, evaluating one "what-if" scenario after another. In doing this, we can tell which worlds are plausible and which are not, which ideas at their foundations are credible and which are not. Among a wide range of theoretical explanations we can separate those within the realm of possibility from those that lay outside reality. It is not an easy task, but it is both insightful and necessary. . . Rushworth Kidder, President, Institute for Global Ethics, reminds us: "In times of fear people turn to fundamentalist mindsets, and I don't mean that only in terms of religion. There's economic fundamentalism; there's political fundamentalism, and so forth. And that's really a reducing of the complexity to very clear black versus white, right versus wrong, issues. When that happens, it is very easy for people to take stark, and harshly polarized, points of view and simply lob bombs back and forth at one another verbally. I think there is no question that that is, to some extent, the nature of the discourse in this country right now. And I long to have us move to an understanding of the complex nature of these things." Rushworth Kidder (President, Institute for Global Ethics). Radio Interview, "The World," November 22, 2005 It is the little things that build the underpinnings for both our highest triumphs and our deepest failures. It is an aphorism of our field to say that complexity arises from the bottom-up: from the seemingly disordered chaos of local rules there arise ordered global patterns of behavior. In this interpretation of emergence, "Both God and the Devil are in the details." Next year I will be leaving UCLA to build a program in "Artificial Life, Artificial Culture and Evolutionary Computation" at Duke University. I will miss my colleagues here, with whom I worked to build our program in Human Complex Systems. I will also miss the many students I have had who have inspired me with their new insights and ideas and who have pushed me towards confronting the new challenges in our field, just as I have pushed them towards confronting the smallest details of cultural processes. To the many parents who are here, I congratulate you on your daughters' and sons' accomplishments. Your investment in their education has reached one of many levels of fruition. Congratulations to you all. And many "thank you's" to my colleagues, to our students, to their parents, and to our friends… On a lighter note, earlier this week I went to see the movie IRONMAN. I encourage you to see it. Two scenes took my breath away: In it you will see a marvelously compelling simulation of a 3D computer graphics terminal of the future. You will also see a wonderfully convincing simulation of a robotic suit. These are both the result of astronomically complex computer calculations. Think of the millions of bottom-up computations that went into this production. Think, for a moment, what might happen if this talent were turned towards modeling the social and cultural issues of our time? I would also encourage you to attend the upcoming conference on computer graphics called SIGGRAPH, the Association for Computer Machinery's Special Interest Group on Graphics. It will be held at the Convention Center in Los Angeles from August 11th to 15th. There you will see the latest innovations in simulation, largely for the entertainment industry. It is those techniques that we must learn to master. Again, that is SIGGRAPH (spell it out). Some of us will be there… In this talk I've focused mostly on simulation, the re-creation and re-presentation of social and cultural experience as a formal model. Both experience and reflection are essential to understanding; each informs the other. And, reflecting on reflection itself, you may come to realize that it too is another facet of simulation in… Again, "thank you all," my colleagues, our students, their parents, and our friends. . . |
||||||||||||||||
Artificial Life, Artificial Culture & Evolutionary Computation - Simulations using Multiagent and Evolutionary Computation In many ways, computer languages and programs are better representations of reality than spoken and written words. Look at the complexity that surrounds us: The local properties of individual elements give rise to the global properties of chemicals, minerals and life itself. The local properties of cells give rise to the global behaviors of organisms. Local neurons interact to process information giving rise to the global consciousness of the individual. Individuals interact at the local level resulting in the vast complexities of societies and cultures. This is the phenomenon of emergence, the process by which individual actors, or agents, with limited knowledge of the whole, interact with one another simultaneously and in parallel to produce larger global patterns of behavior that may not be apparent to any single individual. This process is also described as "multiple causation" or "multiple agency." Close to the concept and phenomenon of emergence is the process of evolution, described a century ago by Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace. It is difficult to talk about these things in natural spoken language, because language is by nature a serial description, a narrative unfolding through time, usually told from a single individual's perspective. How do you describe a situation in which you have one dozen different personalities, each with a different background, each from a different culture, each pursuing different goals, located in various places and communicating along different networks? How do you do this in natural language? And once described in natural language, how will these individuals interact? What will this situation entail? This can be done in computer languages. The situation can be described with a minimum of ambiguity, and once that set of initial conditions is fixed, the researcher can press "run" to see what these individuals will do. Moreover, she can change the initial conditions at will, change the way those individuals sense and perceive the world, change their goals, and study the outcome. Computer simulations give us the opportunity to study the entailments of a variety of "what if" scenarios. Thy are like having a social science laboratory on your desktop. Whether we simulate the behavior of atoms or ants, quarks or quasars, individuals or cultures, the procedure is similar. They say, "the whole is greater than the sum of its parts," because it is the interaction of the parts that constitute the missing processes. We will wrestle with the philosophies of emergence and evolution through a critical hands-on engagement with artificial life, artificial culture, and evolutionary computation. Most participants enter the course with no previous programming experience whatsoever, yet in the first week everyone creates an application from scratch which illustrates the surprising nature of algorithmic processes with colorful graphics and MIDI sounds. We work with Borland C++ which simplifies the Windows environment and describe the worlds we will create in C++. We write descriptions of interactive processes in detail and run them to explore the often counterintuitive and visually striking results. Among the canonical simulations we may enhance and explore are cellular automata, including Conway's Game of Life, Schelling's segregation model, models of assimilation, aggregation and dispersion, flocking, growth, networks and mapping. Using evolutionary computational techniques we may tweak the Traveling Salesman's Problem to optimize a concert tour, political canvassing, or the itinerary of a Ferenghi trader. We may create applications to evolve visual arts and/or musical compositions. We conclude the course with simulations which self-organize and learn in much the same way that cultural and biological systems do, through the mechanisms of evolution. Thus we end by including the creative force that gave rise to our intelligence in the simulations that we write. Participants are encouraged to work with problems from their own major and/or imagination. Given my own background as an anthropologist, we may also apply simulation to study cultures, cultural change and cultural evolution. The argument for employing simulation to the social sciences might look like this: Empirically, culture comprises individuals, artifacts and groups embedded in social, technological and physical environments, all complexly interacting in simultaneous mutual causation. Although sharing many commonalities, each individual has a distinct identity and conception of the world, a specific repertoire of experiences, beliefs, perceptions, interpretations and behaviors. Each artifact similarly carries information in a distinct way. Describing, understanding and explaining culture thus necessitates representations which not only capture this complexity as a description, but also enact it as a process, thereby enabling the researcher to evaluate suites of theoretical experimental "what-if" scenarios. We may critically explore state-of-the-art multicausal multiagent simulations emphasizing dynamically materially intermediated cultural cognition. In other words, we think not just consciously and in words. We think unconsciously, and with our bodies, and with the material world around us. Where you work and how your work is arranged is also part of your cognition. Moreover, members of a given culture do not share a homogeneous cognitive structure. We form networks of friends and enemies. We will also look at examples of trust, secrecy and deception on international relations as well as at artifacts (material cognitive devices) from the evolution of computation, born from the weaver's loom and from the need for intelligence. As we gain more confidence in writing code, we will connect our simulations and applications to real-world sensors and actuators, to make them aware of, and responsive to, their surroundings. We have a suite of robotic components to work with. Picture, for a moment, the slot machines in Las Vegas. Do the reels on those machines rotate at random? In fact they are driven by stepper motors, controlled by a computer that knows exactly where the wheel is and what icon is showing through the glass. They are no longer real reels, random by virtue of their mechanical construction, rather they are called "virtual reels," highly deterministic in their movements, made to simulate the reels of old. Finally, we will work with a number of rare and once classified cryptographic devices, machines which construct and deconstruct secret codes. These are early electromechanical computers. It was the attempt to decrypt the messages enciphered by these machines, specifically the NAZI German Enigma, that gave rise to the modern computer. From the Polish "Bombe," to the British and American "Bombes" and "Colossus" it was the intelligence community that paved the way for computation as we know it. This course is a must for those who wish to understand the computational environment in which we live and the increasing role it plays overtly and covertly in our lives. Whether you go on to write simulations, supervise a team of programmers, or critically tease out the assumptions hidden behind arguments for policy decisions, we offer a look inside the social and technological processes embedded in our culture. |
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||
"In
times of fear people turn to fundamentalist mindsets, and I don't mean that
only in terms of religion. There's economic fundamentalism; there's political
fundamentalism, and so forth. And that's really a reducing of the complexity
to very clear black versus white, right versus wrong, issues. When that
happens, it is very easy for people to take stark, and harshly polarized,
points of view and simply lob bombs back and forth at one another verbally.
I think there is no question that that is, to some extent, the nature of
the discourse in this country right now. And I long to have us move to an
understanding of the complex nature of these things." Rushworth Kidder (President, Institute for Global Ethics). Radio Interview, "The World," November 22, 2005 |
||||||||||||||||
GRADING PRIMARY SOFTWARE SECONDARY SOFTWARE
|
KEEP YOUR OWN COPIES OF EVERYTHING YOU TURN IN
|