Friam

Game Theory Evolving

Classic

List

Threaded

2 messages Options

Nick Thompson

Game Theory Evolving

Owen,

Game Theory Evolving. (It was in the subject line.)

Have you read any of the others????

N

> [Original Message]
> From: <friam-request at redfish.com>
> To: <friam at redfish.com>
> Date: 8/10/2006 12:38:04 AM
> Subject: Friam Digest, Vol 38, Issue 22
>
> Send Friam mailing list submissions to
> friam at redfish.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> friam-request at redfish.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> friam-owner at redfish.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Friam digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Simulation and policy-making (Douglas Roberts)
> 2. Re: Friam Digest, Vol 38, Issue 3 (Phil Henshaw)
> 3. gintis's Game Theory Evolving (Nicholas Thompson)
> 4. Re: gintis's Game Theory Evolving (Owen Densmore)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 22:00:12 -0600
> From: "Douglas Roberts" <doug at parrot-farm.net>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Simulation and policy-making
> To: sy at synapse9.com, "The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee
> Group" <friam at redfish.com>
> Message-ID:
> <f16528920608092100k1566f404j149ab62a93ce84de at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Phil,
>
> Not quite, unfortunately. EpiSims, and other similar ABMs can all too
> easily be used to identify weaknesses and potential exploits of social
> infrastructures. We did studies for the US DHS that demonstrated exactly
> this a couple of years ago when I still worked at LANL. One example was
> when we simulated the release of a weaponized aerosol pneumonic plague
> disease agent in a certain busy subway station during a simulated rush

hour
> in a simulated Chicago with a simulated population of 6.2 million
people...
>
> --Doug
>
> On 8/9/06, Phil Henshaw <sy at synapse9.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Those who want to use the tools of systems inquiry for secretly
generating

> > new kinds of weapons for central authorities to interfere with what
> > interests them, won't actually learn much and will cause great harm.
> >
> >
> >
> > Phil Henshaw ????.?? ? `?.????
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > 680 Ft. Washington Ave
> > NY NY 10040
> > tel: 212-795-4844
> > e-mail: pfh at synapse9.com
> > explorations: www.synapse9.com
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > *From:* friam-bounces at redfish.com [mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com] *On
> > Behalf Of *Douglas Roberts
> > *Sent:* Tuesday, August 08, 2006 9:40 PM
> > *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Simulation and policy-making
> >
> > Re: simulation and policy-making, a project that my group is working on

at
> > the request of the current Washington administration is helping to do
just
> > that. At the request of a consortium of representatives from the White
> > House, Dept of Treasury, DHS, Dept. of State, and a few other
cabinet-level
> > political types, we have run numerous simulation experimental designs to
> > establish the bounds of the effectiveness of various intervention
strategies
> > for containing an H5N1 pandemic, should it occur in the US. We are
using
> > three simulation codes: EpiSims, Epicast, and one from the Imperial
College
> > in the UK. The name of the project is "Models of Infectious Disease
Agent

> > Study" (MIDAS), and it is funded by NIH. See
> >
> > http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/press/releases/press02202006.html and
> > http://usinfo.state.gov/gi/Archive/2005/Aug/08-339612.html
> >
> > or do a google search on "MIDAS bird flu policy" for more info.
> >
> > --Doug
> >
> > On 8/8/06, Robert Holmes <robert at holmesacosta.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Oh I thank RAND are probably plenty ambitious in what they simulate

for

> > > the US govt. Just check out their research areas:
> > > http://www.rand.org/research_areas/
> > >
> > > Robert
> > >
> > >
> > > On 8/8/06, mgd at santafe.edu < mgd at santafe.edu> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Quoting Robert Holmes <robert at holmesacosta.com>:
> > > >
> > > > > So if 'valid' simulations are being used to give the 'wrong'
> > > > answers, what
> > > > > does that tell us about simulation? Is there ever any hope of
> > > > objectivity
> > > > > (I'll give away the answer to that: no) or do all social

simulations

> > > > -
> > > > > political or economic - inevitably reflect the prejudices of their
> > > > author or
> > > > > funder?
> > > >
> > > > Validated simulations, by definition, reproduce something that the
> > > > authors (or
> > > > funders) deem relevant as a performance metric. But that's not a
> > > > problem with
> > > > models or simulations, assuming the metrics are documented. If the
> > > > authors or
> > > > funders are prone to choosing easy, low dimensional things to fit,
> > > > they just
> > > > need to be more ambitious.
> > > >
> > > > ============================================================
> > > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> > > > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> > > > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ============================================================
> > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> > > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> > > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Doug Roberts, RTI International
> > droberts at rti.org
> > doug at parrot-farm.net
> > 505-455-7333 - Office
> > 505-670-8195 - Cell
> >
> > ============================================================
> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Doug Roberts, RTI International
> droberts at rti.org
> doug at parrot-farm.net
> 505-455-7333 - Office
> 505-670-8195 - Cell
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:

/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20060810/c6ef972a/attachment-0001.h
tml

>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 00:18:21 -0400
> From: "Phil Henshaw" <sy at synapse9.com>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Friam Digest, Vol 38, Issue 3
> To: "'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'"
> <friam at redfish.com>
> Message-ID: <008801c6bc34$07813f70$2f01a8c0 at SavyII>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Well that curve is the clearest kind of complex systems inforation we
> ever get. This is one beautiful and dramatic bullet of information,
> and I think if we ask a hundred systems scientists what it means we'll
> get a lot of opinion, much of it not based on systems theory.
>
> I think what's amazing about the curve is that it shows a remarkably
> clear dynamic in the trust of the nation, a long period on the same path
> of decay. What I read it as, and others may differ, is that out trust
> in war as a response to terror actually never had a growth, climax or
> stability period, only a decay period.
>
> Growth curves are usually direct evidence of the regular organizational
> development processes of complex systems. I think we should include
> using them to locate physical examples of the phenomena we wish to
> model, as one means of finding windows into seeing how they actually
> work.
>
>
> Phil Henshaw ????.?? ? `?.????
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 680 Ft. Washington Ave
> NY NY 10040
> tel: 212-795-4844
> e-mail: pfh at synapse9.com
> explorations: www.synapse9.com
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: friam-bounces at redfish.com
> > [mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com] On Behalf Of Marcus G. Daniels
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 1:37 AM
> > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Friam Digest, Vol 38, Issue 3
> >
> >
> > Phil Henshaw wrote:
> > > What do you
> > > think the amazing shape of the Bush approval curve means, about the
> > > complex system events of American politics?
> > > http://jackman.stanford.edu/blog/?p=74 I rate this as very high
> > > quality data on a very real but unnoticed large scale
> > complex system
> > > behavior. What do you see it as.
> > >
> > It might show that people prefer to follow rather than think.
> >
> > ============================================================
> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 00:31:32 -0400
> From: "Nicholas Thompson" <nickthompson at earthlink.net>
> Subject: [FRIAM] gintis's Game Theory Evolving
> To: "Friam" <Friam at redfish.com>
> Cc: echarles <echarles at clarku.edu>
> Message-ID: <380-22006841043132624 at earthlink.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hi,
>
> Has anybody any thoughts to share about Gintis's new book? I have like

some of Gintis's work as presented at conferences. But I am struggling
with this book because, despite an aura of userfriendliness, the book seems
to leave huge steps out. It seems to be a compilation of dozens and dozens
of games with groovy names and silly stories. Is this what game theory IS
when one gets close to it? Is it true that game theory consists of story
upon story as counterintuitive as the prisonner's dilemma game story. ( To
"cooperate" means to me to be a "cooperative" witness; to defect, would be
to renege on an agreement with the DA to cooperate; teaching students what
these words mean to game theorists is like making them drink Jamestown
Kookaid;). I have learned that there are more categories of games I have
to worry about, and I suppose that is good. I have learned that there are
simultaneous games in which the players move at the same moment and serial
games in which one player moves and then the other. Also there are
symetrical games in which, for instance your payoff playing strategy A with
me is the same as my strategy playing Strategy A with you. So, I have
learned that the game I have spent most time thinking about ... Tragedy of
the Commons type games lke PD games.are actually a narrow category of
games, Simultaneous, symetrical, two player games. (Please dont hesitate
to correct me on any of this)
>
> So, I wondering, within the scope of simultaneous symmetrical two player
games, are there a zillion games that differ only in subtle changes in
their payoff tables AND in their groovy names and silly stories? Could all
of this be collapsed into a 4d space (one dimension for each value in a 2x2
table and the space analysed? The goal would be to identify interesting
regions in this space.
>
> I understand about the importance of metaphors in science and about the
value of "surplus meaning" in models, even including the stuff which is
just plain facetious. I KNOW that one cannot disprove Darwinism by
demonstrating that there is no great FarmerInTheSky called NATURE who is
doing the "selecting". But if this game theory literature is as it appears
in Gintis's book, is it not surplus meaning gone wild????

>
> Feel free to jerk on my chain here: I just dont get it.
>
> Nick
>
>
> Nicholas Thompson
> nickthompson at earthlink.net
> EarthLink Revolves Around You.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:

/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20060810/40cf1261/attachment-0001.h
tml

>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 22:37:52 -0600
> From: Owen Densmore <owen at backspaces.net>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] gintis's Game Theory Evolving
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> <friam at redfish.com>
> Cc: echarles <echarles at clarku.edu>
> Message-ID: <0C063987-C942-4DDE-BE39-CC32B979AF9D at backspaces.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
>
> Which one?
> Game Theory Evolving
> Moral Sentiments and Material Interests
> Unequal Chances: Family Background and Economic Success
> The Emancipatory Promise of Charter Schools
> ....
>
> -- Owen
>
> Owen Densmore
> http://backspaces.net - http://redfish.com - http://friam.org
>
>
> On Aug 9, 2006, at 10:31 PM, Nicholas Thompson wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Has anybody any thoughts to share about Gintis's new book? I have
> > like some of Gintis's work as presented at conferences. But I am
> > struggling with this book because, despite an aura of
> > userfriendliness, the book seems to leave huge steps out. It seems
> > to be a compilation of dozens and dozens of games with groovy names
> > and silly stories. Is this what game theory IS when one gets close
> > to it? Is it true that game theory consists of story upon story
> > as counterintuitive as the prisonner's dilemma game story. ( To
> > "cooperate" means to me to be a "cooperative" witness; to defect,
> > would be to renege on an agreement with the DA to cooperate;
> > teaching students what these words mean to game theorists is like
> > making them drink Jamestown Kookaid;). I have learned that there
> > are more categories of games I have to worry about, and I suppose
> > that is good. I have learned that there are simultaneous games in
> > which the players move at the same moment and serial games in which
> > one player moves and then the other. Also there are symetrical
> > games in which, for instance your payoff playing strategy A with me
> > is the same as my strategy playing Strategy A with you. So, I have
> > learned that the game I have spent most time thinking about ...
> > Tragedy of the Commons type games lke PD games.are actually a
> > narrow category of games, Simultaneous, symetrical, two player
> > games. (Please dont hesitate to correct me on any of this)
> >
> > So, I wondering, within the scope of simultaneous symmetrical two
> > player games, are there a zillion games that differ only in subtle
> > changes in their payoff tables AND in their groovy names and silly
> > stories? Could all of this be collapsed into a 4d space (one
> > dimension for each value in a 2x2 table and the space analysed?
> > The goal would be to identify interesting regions in this space.
> >
> > I understand about the importance of metaphors in science and about
> > the value of "surplus meaning" in models, even including the stuff
> > which is just plain facetious. I KNOW that one cannot disprove
> > Darwinism by demonstrating that there is no great FarmerInTheSky
> > called NATURE who is doing the "selecting". But if this game
> > theory literature is as it appears in Gintis's book, is it not
> > surplus meaning gone wild????
> >
> > Feel free to jerk on my chain here: I just dont get it.
> >
> > Nick
> >
> >
> > Nicholas Thompson
> > nickthompson at earthlink.net
> > EarthLink Revolves Around
> > You.============================================================
> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Friam mailing list
> Friam at redfish.com
> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>
>
> End of Friam Digest, Vol 38, Issue 22
> *************************************

Owen Densmore

Game Theory Evolving

Administrator

Oops, *blush* .. sorry!

I've read the start of Game Theory Evolving, and plan to complete the
Whole Damn Thing. None of the others though.

-- Owen

Owen Densmore
http://backspaces.net - http://redfish.com - http://friam.org

On Aug 10, 2006, at 8:34 AM, Nicholas Thompson wrote:

> Owen,
>
> Game Theory Evolving. (It was in the subject line.)
>
> Have you read any of the others????
>
> N
>