Abstract
This paper stresses the importance of focusing on the modeling process of computational models for precisely understanding a complex organization and for solving given problems in the organization. Based on our claim, we proposes a method of interpretation by implementation (IbI), which explores factors that drastically change simulation results through an investigation on the modeling process of computational models. A careful investigation on the capabilities of the IbI approach, which comprises the three methods of (a) breakdown and representation, (b) assumption or premise modification, and (c) layer change investigation, derives the following conclusions: (1) the IbI approach has the potential of finding underlying factors that determine the characteristics of an organization; (2) the IbI approach can specify points of attention at necessary levels when analyzing an organization; and (3) the IbI approach has suchadvantages as wide applicability, the effective use of employed models, and KISS principle support.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Argyris, C. and D.A. Schön (1978), Organizational Learning. Addison—Wesley.
Arthur, W.B., J.H. Holland, R. Palmer and P. Tayler (1997), “Asset Pricing Under Endogenous Expectations in an Artificial Stock Market,” in W.B. Arthur, S.N. Durlauf, and D.A. Lane (Eds.) The Economy as an Evolving Complex System II. Addison—Wesley, pp. 15–44.
Axelrod, R.M. (1997), The Complexity of Cooperation: Agent—Based Models of Competition and Collaboration, Princeton University Press.
Axtell, R., R. Axelrod, J. Epstein and M.D. Cohen (1996), “Aligning Simulation Models: A Case Study and Results,” Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory (CMOT), 1(1), 123–141. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Burton, R.M. and B. Obel (1995), “The Validity of Computational Models in Organization Science: From Model Realism to Purpose of the Model,” Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory (CMOT), 1(1), 57—71. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Carley, K.M., J. Kjaer—Hansen, M. Prietula and A. Newell (1992), “A prolegomenon to Artificial Agents and Organizational Behavior,” in M. Masuch and M. Warglien (Eds.) Distributed Intelligence: Applications in Human Organization. Elsevier Science Publications, pp. 87–118.
Carley, K.M. (1995), “Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory: Perspective and Directions,” Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, 1(1), 39–56.
Carley, K.M. (1996), “A Comparison of Artificial and Human Organizations,” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 31, 175–191.
Carley, K.M. and D.M. Svoboda (1996), “Modeling Organizational Adaptation as a Simulated Annealing Process,” Sociological Methods and Research, 25(1), 138–168.
Carley, K.M. (1999), “On Generating Hypotheses Using Computer Simulations,” Systems Engineering, 2(2), 69–77.
Cohen, M.D., J.G. March and J.P. Olsen (1972), “A Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 1–25.
Cohen, M.D. and L.S. Sproull (1995), Organizational Learning. SAGE Publications.
Deguchi, H. (1998), “Agent—based Approach for Social Complex Systems—Management of Constructed Social World,” in T. Ishida (Ed.) Community Computing and Support Systems: Social Interaction in Networked Communities, Lecture Notes in Computational Science, Springer—Verlag, vol. 1519, pp. 62–77.
Deguchi, H. (2000), Complex Economics, JUSE (Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers) Press. Ltd. (in Japanese).
Duncan, R. and A. Weiss (1979), “Organizational Learning: Implications for Organizational Design,” in B.M. Staw (Ed.) Research in Organizational Behavior, vol. 1, JAI Press.
Epstein, J.M. and R. Axtell (1996), Growing Artificial Societies: Social Science from the Bottom Up, Brooking Institution Press.
Goldberg, D.E. (1989), Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and Machine Learning, Addison—Wesley.
Holland, J.H., K.J. Holyoak, R.E. Nisbett and P.R. Thagard (1986), Induction, The MIT Press.
Kelly, S. and M.A. Allison (1998), The Complexity Advantage, McGraw—Hill Companies, Inc.
Kim, D. (1993), “The Link Between Individual and Organizational Learning,” Sloan Management Review, Fall, pp. 37–50.
Law, A.M. and D.W. Kelton (1999), Simulation Modeling and Analysis, Industrial Engineering and Management Science Series, McGraw Hill College Div.
Levitt, R.E., G.P. Cohen, J.C. Kunz, C.I. Nass, T. Christiansen and Y. Jin (1994), “The Virtual Design Team: Simulating How Organization Structure and Information Processing Tools Affect Team Performance,” in K.M. Carley, and M. Prietula (Eds.) Computational Organization Theory, Lawlence—Erlbaum Assoc., pp. 1–18.
March, J.G. (1991), “Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning,” Organizational Science, 2(1), 71–87.
Miller, J. (1998), “Active nonlinear tests (ANTs) of complex simulation models,” Management Science, 44(6), 820–830.
Moriarty, D.E., S. Handley and P. Langley (1998), “Learning Distributed Strategies for Traffic Control,” Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference of the Simulation for Adaptive Behavior (SAB'98), pp. 437–446.
Sterman, J. D. (2000), Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World, McGraw—Hill Companies.
Sutton R.S. and A.G. Bart (1998), Reinforcement Learning—An Introduction—, The MIT Press.
Takadama, K., T. Terano, K. Shimohara, K. Hori and S. Nakasuka (1999), “Making Organizational Learning Operational: Implication from Learning Classifier System,” Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory (CMOT), Kluwer Academic Publishers, 5(3), 229–252.
Takadama, K., T. Terano, K. Shimohara, K. Hori and S. Nakasuka (2001): “Towards a Multiagent Design Principle ∼ Analyzing an Organizational—Learning Oriented Classifier System ∼,” Chapter 6, in V. Loia and S. Sessa (Eds.) Soft Computing Agents: New Trends for Designing Autonomous Systems, The Series of Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing, Springer—Verlag, pp. 147–168.
Takadama, K. and K. Shimohara (2001a), “What Kinds of Properties Determine Characteristics of Multiple Learning Agents? ∼ Implications from Goal and Evaluation in Agents ∼,” Proceedings of the International Workshop on Autonomy Oriented Computation (AOC'01) at the 5th International Conference on Autonomous Agents (Agents'01), pp. 21–30.
Takadama, K. and K. Shimohara (2001b), “Exploration and Exploitation Trade—Off in Multiagent Learning,” Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Multimedia Applications (ICCIMA'01), pp. 133–137.
Tesfatsion, L. (2001), “Introduction to the Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Special Issue on Agent—Based Computational Economics,” Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 25(3/4), 281–293.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Takadama, K., Terano, T. & Shimohara, K. Interpretation by Implementation for Understanding a Multiagent Organization. Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory 9, 19–35 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:CMOT.0000012307.23179.cb
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:CMOT.0000012307.23179.cb