DARPA’s Math Challenges have been making their way around the web for a second time, and it got me thinking about how someone—much smarter than me—might go about addressing the second challenge on the list. For reference, here is what DARPA wants us to think about:

Math Challenge 2: The Dynamics of Networks

Develop the high-dimensional mathematics needed to accurately model and predict behavior in large-scale distributed networks that evolve over time occurring in communication, biology and the social sciences.

This certainly fits the commonly referenced “DARPA hard” beltway vernacular, but does this challenge actually move the science forward? I do not say this to be pedantic, or make excuses for myself (or other network researchers, who have not been able to meet this challenge in the year since it as first issued). Instead, I point this out because I think this challenge embodies a fundamental problem in how the scientific community is attempting to address the analysis of dynamic networks.

Continue reading "Thoughts on DARPA’s Math Challenge #2: The Dynamics of Networks" »

Michael at a The Quantitative Peace makes very clever observation regarding Bayesian statistics and Donald Rumsfeld.

I will let you see for yourself, but suffice to say, 'known unknowns' are very confusing...

I will join the rest of the blogosphere in pointing you to reading Noah Shactman's great (expanded) article on Dr. Montgomery McFate. The Senior Social Science Adviser for the US Army’s Human Terrain System Program was recently named to Wired magazine's 2008 Smart List.

I enjoyed the article, though I think it is important remember that there are many aspect of the HTS that are not worth celebrating, and though I think it is critical that the next president listen very carefully to Dr. McFate, for HTS to be a true success it must undergo a serious internal review.

There are a lot of interesting items floating around the web this afternoon...

• Robert Bateman has a great op-ed piece at Intel Dump on the Minerva Initiative, and the predicable response by most academics
• Nature reminds us that bad models are...bad
• Cyber-warfare or hooliganism?
• Addendum: NYC Computer Science and Economics Day
• And on a much lighter note, Nader may have reached an all-tine low [brought to you by Phil Klinkner, GO CONTINENTALS!]

In Punishing the Prince, McGillivray and Smith detail their reasoning for implementing a Leader Specific Punishment (LSP) strategy to induce compliance and cooperation in international relations. Though the mathematical derivations of their model are quite complex, the foundation on which the authors build their argument for when LSP is a good strategy result from two simple—yet critical—observations: leaders are motivated by maintaining power, and the cost of removing a leader must be sufficiently low. The authors present a very compelling argument for LSP with regard to treaty compliance; however, their treatment of LSP in conflict scenarios misses a critical internal dynamic observed in nations during crisis moments.

Continue reading "The “rally effect” on Leader Specific Punishment in conflict scenarios" »

The Journal of Organizational Behavior has put out a call for papers with a research focus on terrorism, disaster, and organizational management.

From the listserv notice:

Research is needed on organizational efforts to address threats from catastrophic events such as terrorism and natural disaster. To this point, however, the organizational sciences have given relatively little attention to studies aimed at understanding terrorism/disaster prevention and response by either single organizations (be they private- or public-sector or non-profit ones), or by multiple-organization networks. Some theories and models adapted from organizational topics might have some relevance to understanding terror/disaster management, but explicit, systematic examination of the relevance of such theories is necessary. Moreover, the unique dynamics (e.g., near-universal generation of powerful emotions; potential substantial disruption of organizations? surrounding environments) of disaster and terror events are likely to render such catastrophes somewhat distinct in processes, worker outcomes, and organizational effects from even other types of crises. On the other hand, the extreme nature of the dangers and demands that disaster/terror can pose for organizations and their members may allow them to be used to illuminate fundamental organizational strategies, mechanisms, processes and outcomes such that broadly-relevant scientific and practical knowledge results.

The deadline for submissions is April 10, 2009. The special issue is intended for publication mid-2010. Papers to be considered for this special issue should be submitted online via http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/job (selecting "Special Issue Paper?" as the Manuscript Type). Please direct questions about the submission process, or any administrative matter, to Managing Editor, Kaylene Ascough, k.ascough@uq.edu.au

The editor of the special issue is very happy to discuss initial ideas for papers, and can be contacted directly:

Keith James, Special Issue Editor, keithj@pdx.edu

Though it is not exactly new (the first issue was released in March 2008), the Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict is new to me so I wanted to pass it on. I came across it quite accidentally, but the mission statement gave me pause to dig deeper...

Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict (DAC) is a pioneering interdisciplinary journal that publishes original papers and reviews that contribute to understanding and ameliorating conflicts between states and non-state challengers. These conflicts too often lead to violence, sometimes to the extremes of terrorism or genocide. Understanding the trajectory to violence requires examination of conflicts that do not escalate to violence as well as those that do. This means studying individuals, groups, and movements who challenge the state without violence, as well as those who turn to radicalism and terrorism. Similarly, it is necessary to study state agents, agencies, and policy makers who respond to challenge without violence, as well as those who turn to torture, ethnic cleansing and genocide. It follows from this multi-level and dynamic perspective that every social science is welcome in the journal.

The inaugural issue covers some very interesting topics related to terrorism, but those that jumped out to me were:

• Jemaah Islamiyah's radical madrassah networks
  Justin Magouirk; Scott Atran


• Terrorism in the year 2020: Examining the ideational, functional and geopolitical trends that will shape terrorism in the twenty-first century
  Paul J. Smith


• Conflict resolution in asymmetric and symmetric situations: Northern Ireland as a case study
  James W. McAuley; Catherine McGlynn; Jon Tonge
  

It is with a very heavy heart that I relay the news that the Bugs 'n' Gas Gal may be departing from the blogosphere. Her top notch insight into WMD issues and the IC, humor, and mysterious anonymity will be sorely missed.

If you have even a fleeting interest in WMD, BGG's archive is an amazing resource that should be bookmarked immediately.

This has nothing to do with national security, but given that I am now immersed in constant colloquial exchanges with my über-diverse classmates, the below map from Strange Maps struck a chord.

Do you ask for a soda, a pop or something else? That question lay at the basis of an article in the Journal of English Linguistics (Soda or Pop?, #24, 1996) and of a map, showing the regional variation in American English of the names given to that type of drink.

Can anyone explain the divergence to "soda" that overlaps southern Illinois and northern Missouri?

UPDATE: Even more fun with U.S.A. map visualizations via Valdis Krebs on SOCNET! Amazon.com is now exploiting its massive book buying database to show political book buying trends in America. Enjoy!

Big thanks to Jeff Carr at IntelFusion for posting the following announcement from the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START), which becomes particularly interesting given the proximity of IARPA to the UMD's campus.

The National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) is issuing a call for academics, graduate students, and homeland security, intelligence, and other relevant practitioners to participate with START as adjunct faculty (in-person and online) on an as needed basis.

START is attempting to build a roster of qualified adjunct faculty members with expertise related to the center’s mission of studying the human causes and consequences of terrorism. START is recruiting individuals interested in teaching specific courses, described below, as well as additional courses which may be proposed in the application.

Continue reading "START looking for help" »