A standard form of citation of this article is:
Ahrweiler, Petra and Gilbert, Nigel (2005). 'Caffè Nero: the Evaluation of Social Simulation'. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 8(4)14 <https://www.jasss.org/8/4/14.html>.
The following can be copied and pasted into a Bibtex bibliography file, for use with the LaTeX text processor:
@article{ahrweiler2005,
title = \{Caff\\`{e} Nero: the Evaluation of Social Simulation},
author = \{Ahrweiler, Petra and Gilbert, Nigel},
journal = \{Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation},
ISSN = \{1460-7425},
volume = \{8},
number = \{4},
pages = \{14},
year = \{2005},
URL = \{https://www.jasss.org/8/4/14.html},
keywords = \{Evaluation, Social Simulation, Standard View, Constructivist View, User Community},
abstract = \{This contribution deals with the assessment of the quality of a simulation by discussing and comparing "real-world" and scientific social simulations. We use the example of the Caff\\`{e} Nero in Guildford as a 'real-world' simulation of a Venetian caf\'{e}. The construction of everyday simulations like Caff\\`{e} Nero has some resemblance to the construction procedure of scientific social simulations. In both cases, we build models from a target by reducing the characteristics of the latter sufficiently for the purpose at hand; in each case, we want something from the model we cannot achieve easily from the target. After briefly discussing the 'ordinary' method of evaluating simulations called the 'standard view' and its adversary, a constructivist approach asserting that 'anything goes', we heed these similarities in the construction process and apply evaluation methods typically used for everyday simulations to scientific simulation and vice versa. The discussion shows that a 'user community view' creates the foundation for every evaluation approach: when evaluating the Caff\\`{e} Nero simulation, we refer to the expert community (customers, owners) who use the simulation to get from it what they would expect to get from the target; similarly, for science, the foundation of every validity discussion is the ordinary everyday interaction that creates an area of shared meanings and expectations. Therefore, the evaluation of a simulation is guided by the expectations, anticipations and experience of the community that uses it – for practical purposes (Caff\\`{e} Nero), or for intellectual understanding and for building new knowledge (science simulation).},
}The following can be copied and pasted into a text file, which can then be imported into a reference database that supports imports using the RIS format, such as Reference Manager and EndNote.
TY - JOUR
TI - Caffè Nero: the Evaluation of Social Simulation
AU - Ahrweiler, Petra
AU - Gilbert, Nigel
Y1 - 2005/10/31
JO - Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation
SN - 1460-7425
VL - 8
IS - 4
SP - 14
UR - https://www.jasss.org/8/4/14.html
KW - Evaluation
KW - Social Simulation
KW - Standard View
KW - Constructivist View
KW - User Community
N2 - This contribution deals with the assessment of the quality of a simulation by discussing and comparing "real-world" and scientific social simulations. We use the example of the Caffè Nero in Guildford as a 'real-world' simulation of a Venetian café. The construction of everyday simulations like Caffè Nero has some resemblance to the construction procedure of scientific social simulations. In both cases, we build models from a target by reducing the characteristics of the latter sufficiently for the purpose at hand; in each case, we want something from the model we cannot achieve easily from the target. After briefly discussing the 'ordinary' method of evaluating simulations called the 'standard view' and its adversary, a constructivist approach asserting that 'anything goes', we heed these similarities in the construction process and apply evaluation methods typically used for everyday simulations to scientific simulation and vice versa. The discussion shows that a 'user community view' creates the foundation for every evaluation approach: when evaluating the Caffè Nero simulation, we refer to the expert community (customers, owners) who use the simulation to get from it what they would expect to get from the target; similarly, for science, the foundation of every validity discussion is the ordinary everyday interaction that creates an area of shared meanings and expectations. Therefore, the evaluation of a simulation is guided by the expectations, anticipations and experience of the community that uses it – for practical purposes (Caffè Nero), or for intellectual understanding and for building new knowledge (science simulation).
ER -