Darwin@Home
Locked
 
|
Hi Everybody,
.... but what about the circularity problem posed in my earlier post? If there are no external constraints to which natural selection is shaping whatever it is shaping, in what sense does the shapee become "adapted" except in the [now] trivial sense that it is under selection? Nick Nicholas S. Thompson Professor of Psychology and Ethology Clark University [hidden email] http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/ [hidden email] > [Original Message] > From: Russell Standish <[hidden email]> > To: <[hidden email]>; The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]> > Cc: Stephen Guerin <[hidden email]> > Date: 1/11/2005 3:01:04 PM > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Darwin@Home > > I'm not entirely sure I could give a precise definition of adaption > either, but it is clear that it differs from natural/artificial > selection. The Bedau-Packard activity stats (see the numerous papers > by Mark Bedau et al. on the subject) provides a measure of adaption, > and it is possible for evolutionary systems (systems with variation > and selection) to not experience adaption at all. The classic example > is an evolutionary system operating above the error threshold (aka > mutational meltdown). > > Note that when the concept of fitness is present, adaption is rather > easy to define. However, not all evolutionary systems have a notion of > fitness - in particular most of the interesting ones don't. > > Cheers > > On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 02:19:54PM -0700, Nicholas Thompson wrote: > > Steve, > > > > We must consider if we want the statements > > > > "natural selection begets adaptation" > > > > or > > > > "the adapted organism is favorably selected" > > > > to be analytical or contingent. I.e., do we want them to be like 2 + > > 4, or do we want them to be like "steve Guerin has a red tie on today." > > > > I prefer them to be contingent, which means of course that is possible to > > imagine worlds in which natural selection does NOT produce adaptation and > > worlds in which the adapted organism is NOT favorably. > > > > To make the truth of these statements contingent, adaptation has to be > > defined in a way that is unconnected with the definition of natural > > selection. Adaptation cannot be defined as, "Whatever natural selection > > produces." nor can the adapted organism be defined as that organism that > > has the most offspring. How can we define adaptation and how can we > > recognize the adapted organism without counting the number of its offspring > > > > To answer this question I think we need to turn to the thinking of a much > > abused and little known author who has defined adaptation as "natural > > design". Natural design is, roughly, "whatever properties of nature that > > WOULD lead us to make attributions of intentional design except that we > > know they arent." What ARE those properties. A sahib, that is the > > problem. > > Unfortuately, nobody (except the aforementioned lonely thinker) has given > > this problem any damn thought at all and the lonely thinking has been too > > stupid to make much progress on it on his own. > > > > I do know, though that a natural selection program that does not adapt in > > some [other] sense is not doing evolution. > > > > Nick > > > > Nick > > > > > > > > Nicholas S. Thompson > > Professor of Psychology and Ethology > > Clark University > > [hidden email] > > http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/ > > [hidden email] > > > > > > > [Original Message] > > > From: Stephen Guerin <[hidden email]> > > > To: <[hidden email]>; The Friday Morning Applied > > Coffee Group <[hidden email]> > > > Date: 1/10/2005 1:01:54 PM > > > Subject: RE: [FRIAM] Darwin@Home > > > > > > Nick writes: > > > > Do these models have adaptation? Most models of this type that I have > > > > been exposed to have evolution and natural selection but not > > > > ADAPTATION. > > > > > > Hmm, you may define "adaptation" in a more rigorous way than I. > > > > > > I consider natural selection to be a form of adaptation. Learning during > > an > > > agent's lifetime is another form of adaptation. And, manipulation of the > > > environment, as in the indirect communication via pheromone fields in ant > > > foraging, to be a third form of adaptation for an agent system. > > > > > > As a generality, I'd say most Alife models primary mechanism of adaptation > > > is natural or artificial selection. > > > > > > However, Larry Yaeger's Polyworld, which is one of the models on the link, > > > does include non-hereditary adaptation through Hebbian learning. From his > > > paper (http://www.beanblossom.in.us/larryy/Yaeger.ALife3.pdf): > > > > > > "PolyWorld brings together biologically motivated > > > genetics, simple simulated physiologies and metabolisms, Hebbian learning > > in > > > arbitrary neural network > > > architectures, a visual perceptive mechanism, and a suite of primitive > > > behaviors in artificial organisms > > > grounded in an ecology just complex enough to foster speciation and > > > inter-species competition. > > > Predation, mimicry, sexual reproduction, and even communication are all > > > supported in a > > > straightforward fashion. The resulting survival strategies, both > > individual > > > and group, are purely > > > emergent, as are the functionalities embodied in their neural network > > > "brains". Complex behaviors > > > resulting from the simulated neural activity are unpredictable, and change > > > as natural selection acts over > > > multiple generations." > > > > > > Your point is interesting. I guess what constitutes an Alife model is > > rather > > > fuzzy. In the late 80s and early 90s I'd say ~70% of Alife models had > > GA/GP > > > mechanisms as central components. That said, tangentially related models > > > like flocking, ant foraging models and machine learning models were also > > > included in the conferences. Since the mid-90s, I think the meaning of > > what > > > constitutes a living system to the Alife community has pushed out from a > > > naive application of neo-darwinist mechanism. Some would argue for the > > > necessary presence of generalized thermodynamic work-cycles for an Alife > > > system to be considered "alive". "Some" being me with a mouse in my > > > ;-) > > > > > > -S > > > ________________________________________________________ > > > [hidden email] http://www.redfish.com > > > office: (505)995-0206 624 Agua Fria Street > > > mobile: (505)577-5828 Santa Fe, NM 87501 > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Nicholas Thompson [mailto:[hidden email]] > > > > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2005 11:25 AM > > > > To: [hidden email] > > > > Subject: [FRIAM] RE: Friam Digest, Vol 19, Issue 10 > > > > > > > > > > > > Steve, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just being annoying, > > > > > > > > Nick > > > > > > > > Nicholas S. Thompson > > > > Professor of Psychology and Ethology > > > > Clark University > > > > [hidden email] > > > > http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/ > > > > [hidden email] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Today's Topics: > > > > > > > > > > 1. Darwin@Home (Stephen Guerin) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Message: 1 > > > > > Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 00:27:13 -0700 > > > > > From: "Stephen Guerin" <[hidden email]> > > > > > Subject: [FRIAM] Darwin@Home > > > > > To: "Friam" <[hidden email]> > > > > > Message-ID: <[hidden email]> > > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > > > > > > > > Biota.org is back up and promoting Darwin@Home. > > > > > http://www.darwinathome.org/mission/index.html > > > > > > > > > > Some familiar Alife applications are adapting to it: > > > > > > > > > > - Fluidium: Gerald De Jong's "tensegrity" structures. Nice example > > of > > > > JOGL > > > > > and webstart > > > > > I believe Owen passed around a link 6 months ago: > > > > > http://fluidiom.sourceforge.net/ > > > > > > > > > > - SodaBot -> SodaRace > > > > > > > > > > - Larry Yaeger's PolyWorld > > > > > > > > > > - More at: http://www.darwinathome.org/teams/index.html > > > > > > > > > > -Steve > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________ > > > > > [hidden email] http://www.redfish.com > > > > > office: (505)995-0206 624 Agua Fria Street > > > > > mobile: (505)577-5828 Santa Fe, NM 87501 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Friam mailing list > > > > > [hidden email] > > > > > http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > End of Friam Digest, Vol 19, Issue 10 > > > > > ************************************* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ============================================================ > > > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > > > Meets Fridays 9AM @ Jane's Cafe > > > > Lecture schedule, archives, unsubscribe, etc.: > > > > http://www.friam.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ============================================================ > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > Meets Fridays 9AM @ Jane's Cafe > > Lecture schedule, archives, unsubscribe, etc.: > > http://www.friam.org > > -- > *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which > is of type "application/pgp-signature". Don't worry, it is not a > virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this > email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you > may safely ignore this attachment. > > > A/Prof Russell Standish Director > High Performance Computing Support Unit, Phone 9385 6967, 8308 3119 (mobile) > UNSW SYDNEY 2052 Fax 9385 6965, 0425 253119 (") > Australia [hidden email] > Room 2075, Red Centre http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks > International prefix +612, Interstate prefix 02 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
|
Nick writes:
>If there are no external constraints to which natural selection is shaping > whatever it is shaping, in what sense does the shapee become "adapted" > except in the [now] trivial sense that it is under selection? I would say if there are no external constraints, there will be no gradients in the environment from which potential organizations could extract work. Although the mechanism of natural selection would be present, no adaptation will take place. -S ________________________________________________________ [hidden email] http://www.redfish.com office: (505)995-0206 624 Agua Fria Street mobile: (505)577-5828 Santa Fe, NM 87501 > -----Original Message----- > From: Nicholas Thompson [mailto:[hidden email]] > Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2005 9:59 AM > To: Russell Standish; The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > Cc: Stephen Guerin > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Darwin@Home > > > Hi Everybody, > > .... but what about the circularity problem posed in my earlier post? If > there are no external constraints to which natural selection is shaping > whatever it is shaping, in what sense does the shapee become "adapted" > except in the [now] trivial sense that it is under selection? > > Nick > > > > > Nicholas S. Thompson > Professor of Psychology and Ethology > Clark University > [hidden email] > http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/ > [hidden email] > > > > [Original Message] > > From: Russell Standish <[hidden email]> > > To: <[hidden email]>; The Friday Morning Applied Complexity > Coffee Group <[hidden email]> > > Cc: Stephen Guerin <[hidden email]> > > Date: 1/11/2005 3:01:04 PM > > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Darwin@Home > > > > I'm not entirely sure I could give a precise definition of adaption > > either, but it is clear that it differs from natural/artificial > > selection. The Bedau-Packard activity stats (see the numerous papers > > by Mark Bedau et al. on the subject) provides a measure of adaption, > > and it is possible for evolutionary systems (systems with variation > > and selection) to not experience adaption at all. The classic example > > is an evolutionary system operating above the error threshold (aka > > mutational meltdown). > > > > Note that when the concept of fitness is present, adaption is rather > > easy to define. However, not all evolutionary systems have a notion of > > fitness - in particular most of the interesting ones don't. > > > > Cheers > > > > On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 02:19:54PM -0700, Nicholas Thompson wrote: > > > Steve, > > > > > > We must consider if we want the statements > > > > > > "natural selection begets adaptation" > > > > > > or > > > > > > "the adapted organism is favorably selected" > > > > > > to be analytical or contingent. I.e., do we want them to be like 2 + > 2 = > > > 4, or do we want them to be like "steve Guerin has a red tie > on today." > > > > > > I prefer them to be contingent, which means of course that is possible > to > > > imagine worlds in which natural selection does NOT produce adaptation > and > > > worlds in which the adapted organism is NOT favorably. > > > > > > To make the truth of these statements contingent, adaptation has to be > > > defined in a way that is unconnected with the definition of natural > > > selection. Adaptation cannot be defined as, "Whatever > natural selection > > > produces." nor can the adapted organism be defined as that organism > that > > > has the most offspring. How can we define adaptation and how can we > > > recognize the adapted organism without counting the number of its > offspring > > > > > > To answer this question I think we need to turn to the thinking of a > much > > > abused and little known author who has defined adaptation as "natural > > > design". Natural design is, roughly, "whatever properties of nature > that > > > WOULD lead us to make attributions of intentional design > except that we > > > know they arent." What ARE those properties. A sahib, that is the > > > problem. > > > Unfortuately, nobody (except the aforementioned lonely thinker) has > given > > > this problem any damn thought at all and the lonely thinking has been > too > > > stupid to make much progress on it on his own. > > > > > > I do know, though that a natural selection program that does not adapt > in > > > some [other] sense is not doing evolution. > > > > > > Nick > > > > > > Nick > > > > > > > > > > > > Nicholas S. Thompson > > > Professor of Psychology and Ethology > > > Clark University > > > [hidden email] > > > http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/ > > > [hidden email] > > > > > > > > > > [Original Message] > > > > From: Stephen Guerin <[hidden email]> > > > > To: <[hidden email]>; The Friday Morning Applied > Complexity > > > Coffee Group <[hidden email]> > > > > Date: 1/10/2005 1:01:54 PM > > > > Subject: RE: [FRIAM] Darwin@Home > > > > > > > > Nick writes: > > > > > Do these models have adaptation? Most models of this type that I > have > > > > > been exposed to have evolution and natural selection but not > > > > > ADAPTATION. > > > > > > > > Hmm, you may define "adaptation" in a more rigorous way than I. > > > > > > > > I consider natural selection to be a form of adaptation. Learning > during > > > an > > > > agent's lifetime is another form of adaptation. And, manipulation of > the > > > > environment, as in the indirect communication via pheromone > fields in > ant > > > > foraging, to be a third form of adaptation for an agent system. > > > > > > > > As a generality, I'd say most Alife models primary mechanism of > adaptation > > > > is natural or artificial selection. > > > > > > > > However, Larry Yaeger's Polyworld, which is one of the models on the > link, > > > > does include non-hereditary adaptation through Hebbian > learning. From > his > > > > paper (http://www.beanblossom.in.us/larryy/Yaeger.ALife3.pdf): > > > > > > > > "PolyWorld brings together biologically motivated > > > > genetics, simple simulated physiologies and metabolisms, Hebbian > learning > > > in > > > > arbitrary neural network > > > > architectures, a visual perceptive mechanism, and a suite > of primitive > > > > behaviors in artificial organisms > > > > grounded in an ecology just complex enough to foster speciation and > > > > inter-species competition. > > > > Predation, mimicry, sexual reproduction, and even communication are > all > > > > supported in a > > > > straightforward fashion. The resulting survival strategies, both > > > individual > > > > and group, are purely > > > > emergent, as are the functionalities embodied in their > neural network > > > > "brains". Complex behaviors > > > > resulting from the simulated neural activity are unpredictable, and > change > > > > as natural selection acts over > > > > multiple generations." > > > > > > > > Your point is interesting. I guess what constitutes an > Alife model is > > > rather > > > > fuzzy. In the late 80s and early 90s I'd say ~70% of Alife > models had > > > GA/GP > > > > mechanisms as central components. That said, tangentially related > models > > > > like flocking, ant foraging models and machine learning models were > also > > > > included in the conferences. Since the mid-90s, I think the > meaning of > > > what > > > > constitutes a living system to the Alife community has pushed out > from a > > > > naive application of neo-darwinist mechanism. Some would > argue for the > > > > necessary presence of generalized thermodynamic work-cycles for an > Alife > > > > system to be considered "alive". "Some" being me with a mouse in my > > > > ;-) > > > > > > > > -S > > > > ________________________________________________________ > > > > [hidden email] http://www.redfish.com > > > > office: (505)995-0206 624 Agua Fria Street > > > > mobile: (505)577-5828 Santa Fe, NM 87501 > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Nicholas Thompson [mailto:[hidden email]] > > > > > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2005 11:25 AM > > > > > To: [hidden email] > > > > > Subject: [FRIAM] RE: Friam Digest, Vol 19, Issue 10 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Steve, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just being annoying, > > > > > > > > > > Nick > > > > > > > > > > Nicholas S. Thompson > > > > > Professor of Psychology and Ethology > > > > > Clark University > > > > > [hidden email] > > > > > http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/ > > > > > [hidden email] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Today's Topics: > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Darwin@Home (Stephen Guerin) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > Message: 1 > > > > > > Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 00:27:13 -0700 > > > > > > From: "Stephen Guerin" <[hidden email]> > > > > > > Subject: [FRIAM] Darwin@Home > > > > > > To: "Friam" <[hidden email]> > > > > > > Message-ID: > <[hidden email]> > > > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > > > > > > > > > > Biota.org is back up and promoting Darwin@Home. > > > > > > http://www.darwinathome.org/mission/index.html > > > > > > > > > > > > Some familiar Alife applications are adapting to it: > > > > > > > > > > > > - Fluidium: Gerald De Jong's "tensegrity" structures. Nice > example > > > of > > > > > JOGL > > > > > > and webstart > > > > > > I believe Owen passed around a link 6 months ago: > > > > > > http://fluidiom.sourceforge.net/ > > > > > > > > > > > > - SodaBot -> SodaRace > > > > > > > > > > > > - Larry Yaeger's PolyWorld > > > > > > > > > > > > - More at: http://www.darwinathome.org/teams/index.html > > > > > > > > > > > > -Steve > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________ > > > > > > [hidden email] http://www.redfish.com > > > > > > office: (505)995-0206 624 Agua Fria Street > > > > > > mobile: (505)577-5828 Santa Fe, NM 87501 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > Friam mailing list > > > > > > [hidden email] > > > > > > http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > End of Friam Digest, Vol 19, Issue 10 > > > > > > ************************************* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ============================================================ > > > > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > > > > Meets Fridays 9AM @ Jane's Cafe > > > > > Lecture schedule, archives, unsubscribe, etc.: > > > > > http://www.friam.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ============================================================ > > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > > Meets Fridays 9AM @ Jane's Cafe > > > Lecture schedule, archives, unsubscribe, etc.: > > > http://www.friam.org > > > > -- > > *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which > > is of type "application/pgp-signature". Don't worry, it is not a > > virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this > > email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you > > may safely ignore this attachment. > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > > A/Prof Russell Standish Director > > High Performance Computing Support Unit, Phone 9385 6967, 8308 3119 > (mobile) > > UNSW SYDNEY 2052 Fax 9385 6965, > 0425 253119 (") > > Australia > > Room 2075, Red Centre > http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks > > International prefix +612, Interstate prefix 02 > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9AM @ Jane's Cafe > Lecture schedule, archives, unsubscribe, etc.: > http://www.friam.org > > |
«
Return to Friam
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |