The following appeared on the Scientific
American "Ask the
experts" web
site. "Has chaos
theory found any useful
application in the social
sciences?"
Allison Brown
Chicago, Illinois
Blake LeBaron
of the University of Wisconsin,
Madison, is one of the leading
researchers investigating the
role of chaos theory in
economic systems. He wrote in to
expand on the brief reply to
this question that we
previously posted.
"Overview: It has
been more than 10 years since
ideas from deterministic chaos
began appearing in the social
science literature. This
interdisciplinary spread of ideas
was accompanied by expectations
that many major problems in the
social sciences could be easily
'solved' using chaos-inspired
techniques. It is probably true
that many early expectations for
chaos were not fulfilled. Its
role has not faded completely
away, however. Important ideas
and methods have been adapted
from the dynamical systems
literature. I believe that chaos
has had an impact, though in
different ways from those
predicted at the onset.
"One of several key ideas
in chaos is that simple models
can generate very rich (and
random-looking) dynamics.
Implicit in some early work in
the social sciences was a hope
that simple chaotic models of
social phenomena could be matched
up with many of the near-random
and difficult-to-explain
empirical patterns that are
observed. This early goal has
proved elusive.
"One problem is that
determining if a time series was
generated by deterministic chaos
is not easy. (A time series is a
data set showing the state of a
system over a period of time--a
sequence of voting results, for
instance, or the fluctuating
price of gold.) There is no
single statistic capable of being
estimated that indicates what is
going on in a social system.
Also, many common time-series
problems (such as seasonality and
trends) can confuse most of the
diagnostic tools that people use.
These complications have led to
many conflicting results.
Building an easy-to-use test that
can handle the intricacies of a
real-world time series is a tough
problem, one which will probably
not be solved anytime soon.
"A second difficulty is
that most of the theoretical
structure in chaos is based on
purely deterministic models that
have no noise, or at most just a
very small amount of noise,
affecting the dynamics of the
system. This approach works well
in many physical situations, but
it does not offer a very good
picture of most social
situations. It is hard to look at
social systems isolated from the
environment in the way that one
can analyze fluid in a laboratory
beaker. Once noise plays a major
role in the dynamics, the
problems involved in analyzing
nonlinear systems become much
more difficult.
"Empirical Successes
and Failures: Chaos pushed
empirical researchers in many
fields to analyze their well-worn
data from a new perspective. In
the social sciences, economics
and finance--fields in which
researchers have relatively long,
clean data sets to work
with--have probably led the
group, but there has been some
work in other areas.
"The early excitement
about chaos theory centered on
the fact that many of the
diagnostics used in physics could
be applied to any time series,
independent of the theories of
what causes it to change. But
again, most of these tests were
designed for the low-noise worlds
of experimental physics. (They
also worked best with what is
called 'low-dimensional chaos,'
meaning they were designed for
chaotic systems that themselves
were not too complicated.)
Analysis of time series in the
social sciences often gave
indications of previously
unanticipated structure, but few
or no strong statements could be
made about the sort of
low-dimensional chaos studied in
physics.
"Much interest focused on
the role of chaos in finance,
because of the abundance of data
and the obvious interest in
detecting unknown, predictable
patterns. Once again, the tests
have indicated the presence of
enough nonlinear structure to
fuel debates about the
predictability of stock prices
and foreign exchange rates, but
definitive statements about chaos
lie well beyond what the data are
able to tell us. Much of this
failure stems from the fact that
chaos tests depend on
predictability to some extent.
Many tests monitor short-range
forecasts and the speed at which
they degrade. If the degradation
happens sufficiently quickly,
this behavior can be listed as
one of several necessary
conditions for chaos. But in
financial markets, any observable
structure is weak at best, and
measuring the precise speed at
which a forecast degrades is
probably a hopeless task.
"Although fitting chaotic
processes to social-science data
series has proved problematic,
certain nonlinear time series
tools and techniques inspired by
chaos have thrived. Chaos served
an important role for empirical
researchers, reminding them how
much structure in a time series
could be invisible to the
standard linear diagnostics that
were in use 15 years ago. In many
fields, both physical and social,
time series that were thought to
be random, or derived from linear
dynamics, have been reanalyzed
using new, more powerful
diagnostics. In many cases,
researchers have found previously
unknown, deterministic
structures. These structures call
into question some existing
theories about the analysis of
variable systems.
Modeling Potential: On
the theoretical side, there is a
fairly large common thread that
runs through most of the social
sciences. In many cases, simple,
well-understood models have been
shown to exhibit chaotic
dynamics. Models for business
cycles, democratic voting and
arms races, have all been
demonstrated to possess the
possibility for chaos. These
findings have instigated a long
process of debate and empirical
testing. Typical arguments have
centered on whether the models
make any sense and whether the
parameter values used in the
models lie within a reasonable
range.
"In some instances,
researchers have attempted to
make empirical estimates, but the
basic properties that make
chaotic models interesting also
make them hard to estimate.
Fitting past data is possible,
but somewhat dangerous for
evaluating and testing models.
Few models, if any, have been put
to the definitive test of
out-of-sample prediction. A
powerful test would be an
experimental one in which a
parameter is slowly adjusted and
the resulting dynamics of the
system observed. Such experiments
have been crucial in fluid
dynamics and have even been
attempted in population-dynamics
studies of beetles, but
performing such a test will
always be difficult in the social
sciences. Therefore, theory has
left us with many possible roles
for chaos in social systems, but
none of these has been rigorously
demonstrated to offer a good
picture of how the systems really
work. (Many of these theories
about unusual dynamics actually
predate the 'chaos era.'
Researchers working on voting
theory and business cycles have
known that the stability and
dynamics of their systems could
be badly behaved, or chaotic, for
quite some time.)
"One recent development
in the theory of social systems
has been the move away from
aggregate, large-scale models.
New models inspired by complex
systems build social systems from
the bottom up; behavior is
simulated for individual agents,
then taken to the aggregate level
either through analytic methods
or through explicit computer
simulations. This revised
approach gives a picture that is
far less mechanical than that
proposed by the first wave of
theory, and uses simpler,
better-defined assumptions about
small-scale behavior (rather than
hoping for some kind of
convergence of the macro dynamics
to a relatively simple chaotic
mapping). This promising area of
investigation is only in its
early stages, but it will
probably become more important in
the future.
Policy Questions:
Finally, there are important
policy reasons for continuing the
push to understand the impact of
nonlinearities and chaos in
social systems. The control of
nonlinear systems can actually be
easier than the control of linear
ones, because it might take only
a small push to engender a big
change in the system. In other
words, small, low-cost policy
changes could have a large impact
on overall social welfare. On the
minus side, it may be very
difficult to determine reliably
when and where to apply these
policies, and how to evaluate
their impact.
"There are areas where
social and physical dynamical
systems interact in complex ways.
One example of this is the spread
of infectious diseases such as
AIDS. Understanding the linkages
between the nonlinear dynamics of
the biological components and the
sociological components of such
diseases will be crucial to
understanding and, hopefully,
controlling their spread.