1 / 27

Carlos Lemos 1,2,3 , Helder Coelho 2 , Rui J. Lopes 3,4

EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013. Agent-based modeling of social conflict , civil violence and revolution : state-of-the-art review and further prospects. Carlos Lemos 1,2,3 , Helder Coelho 2 , Rui J. Lopes 3,4

albany
Download Presentation

Carlos Lemos 1,2,3 , Helder Coelho 2 , Rui J. Lopes 3,4

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 Agent-basedmodelingof social conflict, civil violenceandrevolution: state-of-the-artreviewandfurtherprospects Carlos Lemos1,2,3, Helder Coelho2, Rui J. Lopes3,4 1 Instituto de Estudos Superiores Militares (IESM), Lisbon, Portugal 2 Faculty of Sciences of the University of Lisbon, Portugal 3 Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), Lisbon, Portugal4Instituto de Telecomunicações IT-IUL, Lisbon, Portugal

  2. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 CONTEXT & MOTIVATION CONFLICT & PROTEST DYNAMICS SOA REVIEW DISCUSSION FUTURE PROSPECTS (ONGOING WORK) http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-v0yD5CrO8Fw/UFb4b8BmT3I/AAAAAAAAV6s/Djq5mzkqM4M/s1600/222222.jpg http://db2.stb.s-msn.com/i/7B/F35CB26D513744D8A788DD7E24A8B.jpg http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=manifesta%c3%a7%c3%a3o+15+setembro+parlamento+mulher+nua&view=detail&id=5D88C21BFC553882E91EC717DDA46BD213F08FBA http://www.meiosepublicidade.pt/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/carga-policial-300x222.jpg

  3. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 CONTEXT & MOTIVATION CONFLICT & PROTEST DYNAMICS SOA REVIEW DISCUSSION FUTURE PROSPECTS (ONGOING WORK) QUESTIONS: How do large protest demonstrations form and how can these turn to violent confrontation? How do protest demonstrations change the social and political context? Can these links be understood? Predicted? Controlled?

  4. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 CONTEXT & MOTIVATION CONFLICT & PROTEST DYNAMICS SOA REVIEW DISCUSSION FUTURE PROSPECTS (ONGOING WORK) SOCIAL CONFLICT PHENOMENA: tentativeclassificationframework Syria Afghanistan Civil War, International War EMERGENCE, CAS behavior Egypt Insurgence, terrorism Brazil Riots Greece Intensity Protest demonstrations, with violence Portugal Hierarchical Thinking & Approaches Peaceful protest demonstrations, flash mobs TRANSITIONS Psychology, Sociology, History Military Sciences (Military History, Military Strategy, “Operational Art”) Security Studies, Police Studies

  5. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 CONTEXT & MOTIVATION CONFLICT & PROTEST DYNAMICS SOA REVIEW DISCUSSION FUTURE PROSPECTS (ONGOING WORK) WORLD media, SN … COUNTRY SOCIAL CONTEXT INTENSITY Political, Economic, Social: #protests, violence … … … … Time Protest Protest Protest Protest COMPLEX PATH DEPENDENT

  6. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 CONTEXT & MOTIVATION CONFLICT & PROTEST DYNAMICS SOA REVIEW DISCUSSION FUTURE PROSPECTS (ONGOING WORK) ABM OF SOCIAL CONFLICT, CIVIL VIOLENCE AND REVOLUTION: Framework – simplified ODD (Grimmet al., 2010)

  7. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 CONTEXT & MOTIVATION CONFLICT & PROTEST DYNAMICS SOA REVIEW DISCUSSION FUTURE PROSPECTS (ONGOING WORK) • REVIEW: • Sevenmodels • Civil violence • Workerprotest • Riots • Urban crime • Revolution • Guerrillawarfare

  8. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 CONTEXT & MOTIVATION CONFLICT & PROTEST DYNAMICS SOA REVIEW DISCUSSION FUTURE PROSPECTS (ONGOING WORK) EPSTEIN (2002): Modeling civil violence: An Agent-Based computational approach Purpose: simulation of rebellion against a central authority or violence between 2 groups “perceived grievance” G =H×(1-L) “net risk” N=R×P×J α quiet arrest rebellious agents within “vision radius” population rebellious jailed police move at random move at random outbursts of violence gradual reduction of police safe havens in peacekeeping Source: Epstein (2002)

  9. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 CONTEXT & MOTIVATION CONFLICT & PROTEST DYNAMICS SOA REVIEW DISCUSSION FUTURE PROSPECTS (ONGOING WORK) (VERY) PRELIMINARY RESULTS: all quiet before a burst of rebellion…

  10. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 CONTEXT & MOTIVATION CONFLICT & PROTEST DYNAMICS SOA REVIEW DISCUSSION FUTURE PROSPECTS (ONGOING WORK) (VERY) PRELIMINARY RESULTS: … and now a large rebellious uprise !

  11. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 CONTEXT & MOTIVATION CONFLICT & PROTEST DYNAMICS SOA REVIEW DISCUSSION FUTURE PROSPECTS (ONGOING WORK) RATIONAL BEHAVIOR MODEL FINDINGS: agentbehaviorframeworks in S-O-A models memory/memoryless reactive/deliberative collective behavior events environmental features CHANGE STATE, SELECT/PERFORM ACTION RULE-BASED BEHAVIOR MODEL “grievance” “net risk perception” “threshold”

  12. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 CONTEXT & MOTIVATION CONFLICT & PROTEST DYNAMICS SOA REVIEW DISCUSSION FUTURE PROSPECTS (ONGOING WORK) FINDINGS: strengths & explanatorypowerof ABM Intermittentburstsofrebellion/violence (punctuatedequilibrium) [Epstein’smodelandderived ABM] Deceptivebehavior in protester/policeinteraction [Idem] Instabilityofauthoritarian regimes ifaccess to ICT issufficientlywidespread(cascadeofreferencerevelationleading to revolution) [Makowsky & Rubin model] Multi-stepconcept + empiricalvalidation soundness + robustness +realism [Davieset al. model; Fonoberovaet al. model]

  13. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 CONTEXT & MOTIVATION CONFLICT & PROTEST DYNAMICS SOA REVIEW DISCUSSION FUTURE PROSPECTS (ONGOING WORK) FINDINGS: gaps between ABM andreality Need to relate grievance G, hardship H, etc. to RelativeDeprivation (RD) [Social psychology, empirical data] Assemblingstagenottreated as a contagionprocesswithmultiplecontexts [Network theory, empirical data] Effectof formal/informal media coveragenotconsidered [New typesof agentes (e.g. media, agitators)] Modelingofpolicetactics (mostly …) missing [Refiningpoliceagentmodels] Pathdependencedue to successiveeventsnotconsidered [Multiple 2-step cycles]

  14. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 CONTEXT & MOTIVATION CONFLICT & PROTEST DYNAMICS SOA REVIEW DISCUSSION FUTURE PROSPECTS (ONGOING WORK) FUTURE TRENDS & ONGOING WORK Aim for a frameworkwithtwo-step cycles (CONTAGION  PROTEST)  (CONTAGION  PROTEST)  … Assembling/contagionmodelwithmultiplecontexts Complexcontagion + layered NW Protestmodel StartwithEpstein’smodel, refine agenttypes/attibutes/behavior, addnewtypesofagents Parametrization/validation Collect & process data in real events (images, videos, questionnaires) Obtain data onnews sites, activistgroup sites, etc.

  15. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 CONTEXT & MOTIVATION CONFLICT & PROTEST DYNAMICS SOA REVIEW DISCUSSION FUTURE PROSPECTS (ONGOING WORK) FUTURE TRENDS & ONGOING WORK: thelayered network concept nodes may not be connected in individual context (source: Hamill, 2006) concept(source: Hamill, 2006) . . . … but are linked in multiple influence contexts (source: Hamill, 2006) criteria for tie strength(source: Hamill, 2006)

  16. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 CONTEXT & MOTIVATION CONFLICT & PROTEST DYNAMICS SOA REVIEW DISCUSSION FUTURE PROSPECTS (ONGOING WORK) (VERY) PRELIMINARY RESULTS: analysisofFacebook network of “Que se Lixe a Troika – Queremos as nossas vidas” politicalactivistgroup friendship network: giantcomponent, communitystructures, filteringby node degree groupinteractions network: hubsofactivity

  17. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 CONTEXT & MOTIVATION CONFLICT & PROTEST DYNAMICS SOA REVIEW DISCUSSION FUTURE PROSPECTS (ONGOING WORK) (VERY) PRELIMINARY RESULTS: grievance factors, fromquestionnaires

  18. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 QUESTIONS ?

  19. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 CONTEXT & MOTIVATION CONFLICT & PROTEST DYNAMICS SOA REVIEW DISCUSSION FUTURE PROSPECTS (ONGOING WORK) FUTURE TRENDS & ONGOING WORK: contagionmodels Dodds and Watts (2005) SIR network contagionmodel (Complexcontagion, memoryeffects) * Watts and Dodds (2007) 2-step model of influence (Complex contagion, memoryless, rule-based) Individual decision: keep A or adopt B * Berry et al. (2004) Group recruitment model

  20. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 Berry et al. (2004): Computational Social Dynamic Modeling of Group Recruitment, Sandia National Laboratory Report SAND2003-8754 Purpose: describe recruitment of urbanstreet gangs (surrogate of terrorist groups) Agents:simple agents (2 attributes+SchoolAttendance Tendency – SAT, connected by social networks) + abstract agents (“School” and “Gang”) Assumptions: simple agents (teenagers)decide to attend school or joint gangdepending on where Gindex is cumulative(inflence of pastassociation with gang) and T is a threshold Source: Berry et al. (2004) Source: Berry et al. (2004)

  21. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 Makowsky & Rubin (2011): An Agent-Based Model of Centralized Institutions, Social Network Technology, and Revolutions, Working Paper 2011-05, Towson University Purpose: study large scale social change in authoritarian regimes and influence of ICT (e.g. “Arab Spring Revolution”) Agents: citizens, central authority (government), non-central authority (e.g. police) Assumptions:citizens hide/show preference against authority by maximizing an utility function: central authority may change preference (institutional change) and non-central authority may support central authority or citizens, by maximizing their utility functions:

  22. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 REPRESENTATIVE RESULTS (source: Makowsky & Rubin, 2011):

  23. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 Assessment of Makowsly & Rubin (2011) model: • ADVANTAGES: • Explains revolution as a contagion process of “cascade preference revelation” • Can represent sublevation of non-central authority • Can represent institutional revolution (social context) changes due to revolution (“closes loop”) • LIMITATIONS: • Agents (citizens, n.c. authority) cannot move • Agent actions in protests not represented (essentially a contagion model) • Unrealistic modeling of SN/ICT (oversimplification of SN topology) • Modeling of agents’ behavior not as effective as Epstein’s

  24. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 A. Ilachinsky (2004): EINStein combat model (in “Artificial War. Multi-Agent-Based Simulation of Combat”, World Scientific) Purpose:AB model of land combat Agents:Agent hierarchy (fireman, squad commander, force commander, supreme commander), multiple squads, realistic terrain features, and personality and goal-driven combat/movement actions Formulation:agents select action (move/combat) by minimizing a penalty function: “personality” vector Source: Ilachinsky (2004)

  25. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 Assessment of Ilachinsky (2004) model: • ADVANTAGES: • Useful framework for modeling police forces (actions, movement and hierarchical structure) • More realistic agent behavior • Rich collective/emergent behavior patterns • Realistic scenarios (not considered in simpler models) • Can still deal with a significant number of agents • LIMITATIONS: • Substantially more complicated than e.g. Epstein’s model and related variants • More demanding in terms of computer resources • Maximization/minimization less efficient than threshold comparison • Requires substantial reworking for agents other than police forces (?)

  26. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 Assessment of Ilachinsky (2004) model: • ADVANTAGES: • Useful framework for modeling police forces (actions, movement and hierarchical structure) • More realistic agent behavior • Rich collective/emergent behavior patterns • Realistic scenarios (not considered in simpler models) • Can still deal with a significant number of agents • LIMITATIONS: • Substantially more complicated than e.g. Epstein’s model and related variants • More demanding in terms of computer resources • Maximization/minimization less efficient than threshold comparison • Requires substantial reworking for agents other than police forces (?)

  27. EUMAS2013 – Toulouse 12/14 December 2013 F. Durupɩnar(2010): From Audiences to Mobs: Crowd Simulation with Psychological Factors, PhD Thesis (continuation) 5 factor model of personality: Openness, Consciousness, Extroversion, Aggreableness, Neuroticism Emotion model: Ortony, Clore and Collins (OCC) 22 emotion-model *temperament; average emotional state; less permanent than personality but more persistent than emotions Source: Durupɩnar (2004)

More Related