Umeå universitets logga

During the COVID-19 crisis there have been many difficult decisions governments and other decision makers had to make. E.g. do we go for a total lock down or keep schools open? How many people and which people should be tested? Although there are many good models from e.g. epidemiologists on the spread of the virus under certain conditions, these models do not directly translate into the interventions that can be taken by government. Neither can these models contribute to understand the economic and/or social consequences of the interventions. However, effective and sustainable solutions need to take into account this combination of factors. In this paper, we propose an agent-based social simulation tool, ASSOCC, that supports decision makers understand possible consequences of policy interventions, but exploring the combined social, health and economic consequences of these interventions.

In this chapter, we focus on abstract argumentation and probabilistic abstract argumentation. In particular, we aim at providing the reader with a proper knowledge of how dialogues and disputes are modeled as abstract argumentation graphs and how analysts reason over them. We illustrate the concepts of arguments and attacks, and the most popular semantics, that are properties defined over graphs.

Norms influence behaviour in many ways. In situations such as the COVID-19 pandemic where the effect of policies on the spread of the virus is evaluated, this leads to disputes about their effectiveness. In order to build agent-based social simulations that give proper support for this evaluation process we need agents that properly deal with norms. In this paper we present a new agent deliberation architecture that takes more aspects of norms into account than traditional architectures have done. Dealing properly with norms means that agents can reason through the consequences of the norms, that they are used to motivate and not just constrain behaviour, and that the agents can violate the norm as well. For the former we use the ideas of perspectives on norms, while the latter is enabled through the use of values. Within our architecture we can also represent habitual behaviour, context sensitive planning, and through the use of landmarks, reactive planning. We use the example of a restaurant-size based restriction to show how our architecture works.

Since its first appearance in Wuhan (China), countries have been employing, to varying degrees of success, a series of non-pharmaceutical interventions aimed at limiting the spread of SARS-CoV-2 within their populations. In this article, we build on scientific work that demonstrates that culture is part of the explanation for the observed variability between countries in their ability to effectively control the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. We present a theoretical framework of how culture influences decision-making at the level of the individual. This conceptualization is formalized in an agent-based model that simulates how cultural factors can combine to produce differences across populations in terms of the behavioral responses of individuals to the COVID-19 crisis. We illustrate that, within our simulated environment, the culturally-dependent willingness of people to comply with public health related measures might constitute an important determinant of differences in infection dynamics across populations. Our model generates the highest rates of non-compliance within cultures marked as individualist, progressive and egalitarian. Our model illustrates the potential role of culture as a population-level predictor of infections associated with COVID-19. In doing so, the model, and theoretical framework on which it is based, may inform future studies aimed at incorporating the effect of culture on individual decision-making processes during a pandemic within social simulation models.

When creating (open) agent systems it has become common practice to use social concepts such as social practices, norms and conventions to model the way the interactions between the agents are regulated. However, in the literature most papers concentrate on only one of these aspects at the time. Therefore there is hardly any research on how these social concepts relate. It is also unclear whether something like a norm evolves from a social practice or convention or whether they are complete independent entities. In this paper we investigate some of the conceptual differences between these concepts. Whether they are fundamentally stemming from a single social object or should be seen as different types of objects altogether. And finally, when one should which type of concept in an implementation or a combination of them.