Run from program Alliance_Sim, version 3.130 4/13/94 9:26
In this version:
A) energy is being minimized, and
B) within alliance distance is 0 while between alliance distance is 1
Run Number 627
Input file was u9pg01.pro
This file is data for the Unix/business alliances example using the
Alliance_Sim program. File created 4/94 by Scott Bennett by PC-based
propensity_maker_unix program.
This file contains data on 9 countries, including prime as generalist.
(This is a change from the original 1993 specification.)
(Also, new 4/94 size data.)
Alpha = 1.000; Beta = 1.000
Propensity data came from raw input. The data which generated propensities are:
File created 4/13/1994 at 8:0 4
This file created by Propensity_Maker,version 4.000 from input file unix9pgb.raw
# Name Size Generalist
-----------------------------------------------------------------
1 Sun 27.2000 Specialist
2 ATT 28.5000 Generalist
3 IBM 3.8000 Generalist
4 DEC 18.9000 Generalist
5 HP 14.3500 Generalist
6 Apollo 19.9000 Specialist
7 InterG 5.0000 Specialist
8 SGI 4.1500 Specialist
9 Prime 1.0000 Generalist
Initial Propensity*Size Matrix (that is, P(ij)*S(i)*S(j)) is :
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 Sun 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -541.3 -136.0 -112.9 0.0
2 ATT 0.0 1.0 -108.3 -538.7 -409.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -28.5
3 IBM 0.0 -108.3 1.0 -71.8 -54.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 -3.8
4 DEC 0.0 -538.7 -71.8 1.0 -271.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 -18.9
5 HP 0.0 -409.0 -54.5 -271.2 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -14.4
6 Apollo -541.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 -99.5 -82.6 0.0
7 InterG -136.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -99.5 1.0 -20.8 0.0
8 SGI -112.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -82.6 -20.8 1.0 0.0
9 Prime 0.0 -28.5 -3.8 -18.9 -14.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0
Global optimum alliance structure :
Index Alliance_Rep Energy Local_Opt Basin_Size
62 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 -3794.77 62 128
Alliance 1: Sun ATT IBM Prime
Alliance 2: DEC HP Apollo InterG SGI
1 _other_ alliance(s) had the same energy (in the reported half).
They/it will be reported later in the printout.
Permuted Propensity * Size Matrix is :
1 2 3 9 4 5 6 7 8
1 Sun 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -541.3 -136.0 -112.9
2 ATT 0.0 1.0 -108.3 -28.5 -538.7 -409.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
3 IBM 0.0 -108.3 1.0 -3.8 -71.8 -54.5 0.0 0.0 0.0
9 Prime 0.0 -28.5 -3.8 1.0 -18.9 -14.4 0.0 0.0 0.0
4 DEC 0.0 -538.7 -71.8 -18.9 1.0 -271.2 0.0 0.0 0.0
5 HP 0.0 -409.0 -54.5 -14.4 -271.2 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
6 Apollo -541.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 -99.5 -82.6
7 InterG -136.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -99.5 1.0 -20.8
8 SGI -112.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -82.6 -20.8 1.0
There are 2 optima in the non-complement half. They are:
Index Alliance_Rep Energy Local_Opt Basin_Size
62 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 -3794.77 62 128
Alliance 1: Sun ATT IBM Prime
Alliance 2: DEC HP Apollo InterG SGI
207 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 -3794.77 207 128
Alliance 1: Sun DEC HP
Alliance 2: ATT IBM Apollo InterG SGI Prime
Complementary optima of those already seen will not be reported here.
Frustrations of all countries at the starting alliance and (non-complement) optima are:
These are frustrations defined as Frust(i)= Sum over j<>i of Prop(i,j)*Size(j)*Dist(i,j)
Alliance Start= 0 62 207
Sun 0.00 790.16 790.16
ATT 0.00 947.62 947.62
IBM 0.00 126.35 126.35
DEC 0.00 629.37 629.37
HP 0.00 477.86 477.86
Apollo 0.00 541.28 541.28
InterG 0.00 136.00 136.00
SGI 0.00 112.88 112.88
Prime 0.00 33.25 33.25
Non-complement alliances tied for global optimum are:
Index Alliance_Rep Energy Local_Opt Basin_Size
62 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 -3794.77 62 128
207 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 -3794.77 207 128
Starting alliance configuration :
Index Alliance_Rep Energy Local_Opt Basin_Size
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 449 0
Alliance 1: Sun ATT IBM DEC HP Apollo InterG SGI Prime
Alliance 2:
Path from starting configuration to the local optima was :
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 449 0
128 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -2168.85 449 0
384 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -3749.17 449 0
448 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 -3792.87 449 0
449 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 -3794.77 449 128
Top 50 (or maximum) potential alliances follow :
Index Alliance_Rep Energy Local_Opt Basin_Size
62 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 -3794.77 62 128
207 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 -3794.77 207 128
63 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 -3792.87 62 0
206 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 -3792.87 207 0
60 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 -3775.68 62 0
205 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 -3775.68 207 0
61 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 -3773.78 62 0
204 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 -3773.78 207 0
126 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 -3766.27 62 0
143 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 -3766.27 207 0
58 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 -3763.27 62 0
203 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 -3763.27 207 0
59 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 -3761.37 62 0
202 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 -3761.37 207 0
127 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -3749.17 62 0
142 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 -3749.17 207 0
124 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 -3747.18 62 0
141 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 -3747.18 207 0
122 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 -3734.77 62 0
139 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 -3734.77 207 0
125 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 -3730.08 62 0
140 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 -3730.08 207 0
123 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 -3717.67 62 0
138 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 -3717.67 207 0
56 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 -3661.18 62 0
201 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 -3661.18 207 0
57 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 -3659.28 62 0
200 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 -3659.28 207 0
120 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 -3632.68 62 0
137 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 -3632.68 207 0
121 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 -3615.58 62 0
136 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 -3615.58 207 0
111 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 -3611.41 62 0
158 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 -3611.41 207 0
109 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 -3592.32 62 0
156 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 -3592.32 207 0
107 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 -3579.91 62 0
154 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 -3579.91 207 0
110 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 -3571.11 62 0
159 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 -3571.11 207 0
108 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 -3552.02 62 0
157 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 -3552.02 207 0
106 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 -3539.61 62 0
155 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 -3539.61 207 0
105 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 -3477.82 62 0
152 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 -3477.82 207 0
104 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 -3437.52 62 0
153 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 -3437.52 207 0
47 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 -3436.99 62 0
222 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 -3436.99 207 0
University of Michigan Center for the Study of Complex Systems
Contact cscs@umich.edu.
Revised November 4, 1996.