Advertisement

Ensemble Engineering and Emergence

  • Hu Jun
  • Zhiming Liu
  • G. M. Reed
  • J. W. Sanders
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5380)

Abstract

The complex systems lying at the heart of ensemble engineering exhibit emergent behaviour: behaviour that is not explicitly derived from the functional description of the ensemble components at the level of abstraction at which they are provided. Emergent behaviour can be understood by expanding the description of the components to refine their functional behaviour; but that is infeasible in specifying ensembles of realistic size (although it is the main implementation method) since it amounts to consideration of an entire implementation. This position paper suggests an alternative. ‘Emergence’ is clarified using levels of abstraction and a method proposed for specifying ensembles by augmenting the functional behaviour of its components with a system-wide ‘emergence predicate’ accounting for emergence. Examples are given to indicate how conformance to such a specification can be established. Finally an approach is suggested to Ensemble Engineering, the relevant elaboration of Software Engineering. On the way, the example is considered of an ensemble composed of artificial agents and a case made that there emergence can helpfully be viewed as ethics in the absence of free will.

Keywords

Formal Method Deontic Logic Emergent Behaviour Denotational Semantic Fair Coin 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Brooks, R.A.: Intelligence without representations. Artificial Intelligence 57, 139–159 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
    Brown, G., Sanders, J.W.: Lognormal Genesis. Journal of Applied Probability 18(2), 542–547 (1981)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cariani, P.: Emergence and artificial life. In: [20], pp. 775–797 (1991)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chen, C.-C., Nagl, S.B., Clack, C.D.: A calculus for muilti-level emergent behaviours in component-based systems and simulations. In: Proceedings of Emergent Properties in Natural and Artificial Complex Systems (EPNACS 2007), pp. 35–51 (2007), http://www-lih.univ-lehavre.fr/~bertelle/epnacs2007-proceedings/epnacs07proceedings.pdf
  6. 6.
    Cucker, F., Smale, S.: Emergent behaviour in flocks. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 52(5), 852–862 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cucker, F., Smale, S.: On the mathematics of emergence. The Japanese Journal of Mathematics 2, 197–227 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Damper, R.I.: Emergence and levels of abstraction. Editorial for the special edition on Emergent properties of complex systems. International Journal of Systems Science 31(7), 811–818 (2000)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Deguet, J., Demazeau, Y., Magnin, L.: Elements about the emergence issue: a survey of emergence definitions. ComPlexUs 3, 24–31 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Duke, R., Rose, G.: Formal Object-Oriented Specification Using Object-Z. Macmillan Press, Basingstoke (2000)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Floridi, L., Sanders, J.W.: The method of abstraction. In: Negrotti, M. (ed.) Yearbook of the Artificial. Models in Contemporary Sciences, vol. 2. Peter Lang (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Floridi, L., Sanders, J.W.: On the morality of artificial agents. Minds and Machines 14(3), 349–379 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fromm, J.: Types and forms of emergence. Nonlinear Sciences, abstract (June 13, 2005), arxiv.org/pdf/nlin.AO/0506028
  14. 14.
    Gell-Mann, M.: The Quark and the Jaguar. W. H. Freeman and Company, New York (1994)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jun, H., Liu, Z., Reed, G.M., Sanders, J.W.: Position paper: Ensemble engineering and emergence (and ethics?). UNU-IIST Technical report 390 (December 2007), http://www.iist.unu.edu
  16. 16.
    Information Ethics Group, University of Oxford, http://web.comlab.ox.ac.uk/oucl/research/areas/ieg
  17. 17.
    Jadbabaie, A., Lin, J., Morse, A.: Coordination of groups of mobile autonomous agents using nearest neighbor rules. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 48, 988–1001 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Knuth, D.E.: The Art of Computer Programming, 2nd edn. Seminumerical Algorithms, vol. 2. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1981)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kolmogorov, A.N.: C.R. Dokl. Acad. Sci. URSS 30, 301–305 (1941)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Langton, C.G., Taylor, C., Farmer, J.D., Rasmussen, S. (eds.): Artificial Life II. Santa Fe Institute Studies in the Sciences of Complexity, Proceedings 10. Addison-Wesley, Redwood City (1992)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lewes, G.H.: Problems of Life and Mind. First series, vol. 2. Trübner & Co., London (1875)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Li, W.: Random texts exhibit Zipf’s-law-like word frequency distribution. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 38(6), 1842–1845 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    McIver, A.K., Morgan, C.C.: Abstraction, Refinement and Proof for Probabilistic Systems. Springer Monographs in Computer Science (2005)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Motwani, R., Raghavan, P.: Randomized Algorithms. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1995)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pauly, M.: Logic for Social Software. PhD. thesis, CWI Amsterdam (2001)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pepper, S.C.: Emergence. Journal of Philosophy 23, 241–245 (1926)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Reed, G.M., Sanders, J.W.: The principle of distribution. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 59(7), 1134–1142 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Reynolds, C.: Flocks, herds, and schools: a distributed behavioral model. Computer Graphics 21(4), 25–34 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ryan, A.: Emergence is coupled to scope, not level. Complexity 13, 67–77 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sanders, J.W., Turilli, M.: Dynamics of Control. In: Theoretical Advances in Software Engineering 2007, TASE 2007, pp. 440–449. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2007)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/properties-emergent
  32. 32.
    Turilli, M.: Ethical protocols design. Ethics and Information Technology 9(1), 49–62 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Vicsek, T., Czirók, A., Ben-Jacob, E., Cohen, I., Shochet, O.: Novel type of phase transition in a system of self-driven particles. Phys. Rev. Lett. 75(6), 1226–1229 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
  35. 35.
  36. 36.
    Wirsing, M.: (working group leader). InterLink WG 1 Interim Management Report (IMR), WG 1: Software intensive systems and new computing paradigms (June 2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hu Jun
    • 2
  • Zhiming Liu
    • 1
  • G. M. Reed
    • 1
  • J. W. Sanders
    • 1
  1. 1.International Institute for Software TechnologyUnited Nations UniversityMacaoChina
  2. 2.College of Computer and CommunicationHunan UniversityChangshaChina

Personalised recommendations