Download South African Case Study Model Report - CAVES

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts
no text concepts found
Transcript
South African Case Study
Model Report
Shah Jamal Alam, Ruth Meyer, Scott Moss
Centre for Policy Modelling, MMU
CAVES Project Meeting March 2007 ● CPM
1
Table of Contents
Declarative Model
• Current state of the model
• Experiences with Jess
• Next steps
Dynamic Networks Analysis
• Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
• Motifs
CAVES Project Meeting March 2007 ● CPM
2
Declarative Model – Description
Individuals, households and villages
• Distributions extracted from empirical data (RADAR)
• Household size: Normal (7, 3)
• Household head age: Normal (56.2, 12.6)
• Marital status of household head: Empirical discrete,
different for female and male heads
• Age difference between spouses: Normal (8.43, 6.576)
• Type of household member: Empirical discrete
(child 0.653, grandchild 0.238, other 0.109)
• Age of household member: Gamma (2.4, 0.086)
• Number, age and gender of migrants: Empirical discrete
Decisions / behaviour on individual and household level
• Rules for individuals
• Rules for households
CAVES Project Meeting March 2007 ● CPM
3
Declarative Model – Groups
Church
• Importance rated very high according to RADAR data
• 80% of population are member of a church
• Implementation so far based on assumptions:
• 1-4 denominations per village, 1 church / denomination
• Households randomly assigned to churches in their village
• All members of a household belong to the same church
Stokvel (ROSCA)
• Third highest in importance (if there is no other financial support like SEF)
• Provide means to save up for a particular purpose
• Social aspect important: provide social support, enhance social status
• Risk of default is low in small communities
• Defaulters are unlikely to be accepted as members into any other
associations
• Formed between groups of friends, min. 3-8
Burial society
• Second highest in importance, more formal than stokvels
• Next to be implemented
CAVES Project Meeting March 2007 ● CPM
4
Declarative Model – Household Rules
• Household economy, modelled on a monthly scale, largely based
on assumptions
• Food expenses: 120 Rand / 100 Rand / 25 Rand
• Income from state grants: 870 Rand pension / 200 Rand
child grant
• Income from jobs: 800 Rand / 200 Rand
• Income from remittances: ?
• Households buy bulk food at the beginning of each month
• Spend minimum of accumulated food expenses and available
cash
• "Rich" households offer short-term employment ("piece jobs")
• if they can afford it and
• if they need it (modelled stochastically, p = 0.15)
CAVES Project Meeting March 2007 ● CPM
5
Declarative Model – Individual Rules
Endorsements
• Every agent endorses other agents with certain "labels"
• Related to existing links
• Kinship: is-kin
• Neighbourhood: is-neighbour
• Groups like churches: same-church, same-denomination
• Related to behaviour of other agent
• Reliable, trustworthy, honest, capable, recommended
• Unreliable, untrustworthy, dishonest, incapable
• Labels are evaluated according to an individual's endorsement scheme
• Resulting endorsement value is used in decisions
Friendship
Stokvels
• Only household heads are members
• When there is enough money left, household heads express a desire to form a
stokvel and ask other household heads amongst their friends
• If there is consent between a certain number of friends, they start a stokvel
CAVES Project Meeting March 2007 ● CPM
6
Declarative Model – Networks
Multi-layer network on several levels
• Individual level
• Friendship
• Based on endorsements and tags, evolves dynamically
• Acquaintanceship
• Based on group membership
• Family (parent, child, sibling)
• Set at creation of person, based on empirical data
• Household level
• Kinship
• Based on small-world network
• Neighbourhood
• Based on spatial location within village, assigned
randomly at creation
CAVES Project Meeting March 2007 ● CPM
7
Declarative Model – Visualisations
CAVES Project Meeting March 2007 ● CPM
8
Declarative Model – Visualisations
CAVES Project Meeting March 2007 ● CPM
9
Declarative Model – Friendship Network
•
Assumptions used: Friends have
• same gender
• similar age (± 3 years for children, ± 8 years for adults)
• similar interests/character traits
• similar background (same church, neighbour…)
•
Friendship network evolves from these
• Agents evaluate all known other agents
• Compute similarity index based on tags
• Compute endorsement value based on endorsement scheme
• Agents pick highest evaluated agents as friends
• Up to a maximal number of friends
Surprising effect: very low proportion of mutual links
• Solutions tried:
• Special friendship endorsement scheme
• Higher max. number of friends
CAVES Project Meeting March 2007 ● CPM
10
Experiences with Jess
Model implementation
• Java/Repast for model framework
• Jess for all cognition and decision processes
• Java classes (Person, Household, Model…) as shadow facts
• Per time step one run of the Jess engine
 Too slow to be actually used
Problem: Re-computation of the Rete network
Solution: less Jess, more Java
• Fewer rules
• Port procedural stuff to Java
• Browse fact base from Java
• Fewer facts
• Replace facts with fields in Java classes (slots in shadow facts)
CAVES Project Meeting March 2007 ● CPM
11
Experiences with Jess – Example: Fewer facts
(defclass person Person)  has slots name, gender, age, tag… knownPersons
(deftemplate known-person (slot owner) (slot known) (slot tick))
Replace facts with
field (slot)
(defrule adult-similarity-identification
"identify others with most similar and similar tags"
)
(person (tag $?own-tag) (name ?person) (gender ?gender) (knownPersons $?known-persons)
(age ?own-age &: (> ?own-age 12)))
(model (tick ?tick))
(known-person (owner ?person) (known ?other) (tick ?t &:(<= ?t ?tick)))
(person (gender ?gender) (name ?other) &: (member$ ?other ?known-persons))
(age ?other-age
&:(and
(> ?other-age 12)
(< (abs (- ?own-age ?other-age)) 8)))
(tag $?other-tag))
(not
(similarity-index (owner ?person)(other-person ?other)(tick ?t &: (< ?t ?tick))))
=>
(bind ?similarity (number-of-common-attributes ?own-tag ?other-tag))
(assert
(similarity-index (other-person ?other) (similarity ?similarity) (owner ?person) (tick ?tick)))
CAVES Project Meeting March 2007 ● CPM
12
Next steps
Integration of further processes that influence social networks
• Burial societies
• Marriage
• Inheritance of (part of the) tags from parents
• Spread of HIV/AIDS, if possible on a more individual basis
Applying network measures
Improve visualisation and data collection
• Discuss need with case study team
CAVES Project Meeting March 2007 ● CPM
13