Michael Murphy's Computer Systems Project Proposal 
Latimer, period 5.  9/16/05.

MASON

Oct. 5 : prototype 1 - movement is adjacent neighborhoods rather than random.
  Try Moore neighborhood vs von Neuman 

Oct. 7 - prepared writeup for prototype 1 - see
 prototype 1 with screenshots

    Text version:
    	
	My First Modification to an Agent Based Modeling Program

	The original model allowed for the unsatisfied agents in Schelling's 
	neighborhood to move to any space on the board.   This resulted in 
	highly sorted and segregated neighborhoods as minorities would quickly 
	move out of their environment and be replaced by a member of the local 
	majority.  This setup allows for neighborhoods to become completely 
	filled with members of the local majority as majority members can move 
	to the center of the neighborhood, not being bound by local movement 
	restrictions.  The following screenshots of Steps amounts 1, 2, 50, and 51 
	show this principle.

	Note how the population becomes noticeably segregated between steps 1 and 2.

	Note how the neighborhoods are completely defined by steps 50 and 51.
	The happy agents fill completely segregated neighborhoods, and the 
	unhappy agents move randomly in the badlands on the fringe of the 
	neighborhoods as there are no more open ideal locations.
	My modification of Schelling's neighborhood allows the agents only to 
	move to open spaces in their von Neuman adjacent spaces surroundings.
	This lack of mobility resulted in a population that never quite became 
	well sorted and segregated into populations.  A stable neighborhood 
	setup never really generated because same color agents couldn't congregate 
	across distances to form localized majority populations.  The 
	neighborhoods in my modification often have spaces in the middle as the
	outer members have no reason to move in and those outside the neighborhood 
	are unable to move within it due to their movement restrictions.  
	Opposite color agents also often get stuck in the middle of a neighborhood 
	where they are the stark minority, as they become literally trapped in 
	the center of the neighborhood again due to their handicapped movement.
	These stark contrasts to the original setup are easily seen in the 
	sample states from steps 1, 2, 50, and 51 of the modified model.

	In the extension, we can see how the agents do become more segregated in
	step 2 than in step 1.  We can also see, however, that step 2 is much 
	more similar to step 1 than than step 2 in the unmodified version was 
	similar to its previous step.  The localized movement allows for much 
	more easily predictable movement and population patterns.

	The population is fairly segregated by steps 50 and 51, but we can see how 
	the population is much more spread out, taking up most of the available
	terrain.  There are no badlands because the populations do not completely 
	fill the highly desirable inner sections of the neighborhoods.  We can 
	see instances of the spaces in the middle of neighborhoods as well as 
	minorities being trapped within majority environments.

Oct. 14 - absent

Nov. 4 - Website
 "Yes" competition, college board epidmiology scholars

Dec. 14 Current Status Report
     Right now, I am working on getting the bugs out of my first version of my 
     second project for the computer systems lab.  My Classroom class appears to
     be working, but I deleted my classroomVirus class in frustration and I am 
     going to program it again with good style, in hopes that it will work this 
     time. The Student class is also a bit buggy, but I am hoping that if I create
     another classroomVirus then everything will fall into place.  I am desperately 
     trying to get this working by Friday so I can spend that period with Dr. Cammer, 
     getting the ball rolling really fast on finding the actually data that I need 
     to make my project a viable option for the Young Epidemiologists Scholarship 
     that I plan to enter.