a good "clever" model

At IU I had a class where we worked with StarLogo, on
the Mac. Now, it and its cousin NetLogo have been
implemented in Java. NetLogo appears to have its act
more together, though...

http://people.brynmawr.edu/twong/models/pseudoaltruism.html

-Carl

--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@y...> wrote:
> At IU I had a class where we worked with StarLogo, on
> the Mac. Now, it and its cousin NetLogo have been
> implemented in Java. NetLogo appears to have its act
> more together, though...
>
> http://people.brynmawr.edu/twong/models/pseudoaltruism.html
>
> -Carl

it seems both fidelity and altruism probabilities have to be set
quite high for the altruistic ants to survive . . .

the interpretation would seem to be that good people should be good to other
good people, and let the assholes perish. While this is a tempting idea, it
falls far short of true altruism.

Dante

> -----Original Message-----
> From: wallyesterpaulrus [mailto:wallyesterpaulrus@...]
> Sent: Monday, April 28, 2003 5:26 PM
> To: metatuning@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [metatuning] Re: a good "clever" model
>
>
> --- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@y...> wrote:
> > At IU I had a class where we worked with StarLogo, on
> > the Mac. Now, it and its cousin NetLogo have been
> > implemented in Java. NetLogo appears to have its act
> > more together, though...
> >
> > http://people.brynmawr.edu/twong/models/pseudoaltruism.html
> >
> > -Carl
>
> it seems both fidelity and altruism probabilities have to be set
> quite high for the altruistic ants to survive . . .
>
>
>
> Meta Tuning meta-info:
>
> To unsubscribe, send an email to:
> metatuning-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Web page is http://groups.yahoo.com/groups/metatuning/
>
> To post to the list, send to
> metatuning@yahoogroups.com
>
> You don't have to be a member to post.
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Dante Rosati"
<dante.interport@r...> wrote:

> the interpretation would seem to be that good people should be good
to other
> good people, and let the assholes perish. While this is a tempting
idea, it
> falls far short of true altruism.
>
> Dante

exactly. but of course these are ants, not people :)

>it seems both fidelity and altruism probabilities have to be set
>quite high for the altruistic ants to survive . . .

I didn't rigorously verify this, but I found that if fidelity
is set to 1, altruism prob. only determines how long it takes
for altruistic ants to dominate, even if they are initially in
the minority.

-Carl

>the interpretation would seem to be that good people should
>be good to other good people, and let the assholes perish.
>While this is a tempting idea, it falls far short of true
>altruism.

Let's not give up just yet. There's something missing from
this model which puts its results at odds with what you know
is right in the human world. Namely, the altruism you show
someone effects how much they will in turn show someone else.
There are no true blue ants. Perhaps they have already
perished.

-Carl

--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@y...> wrote:
> >it seems both fidelity and altruism probabilities have to be set
> >quite high for the altruistic ants to survive . . .
>
> I didn't rigorously verify this, but I found that if fidelity
> is set to 1, altruism prob. only determines how long it takes
> for altruistic ants to dominate, even if they are initially in
> the minority.

ok, it seems you're right -- at 0.1 altruism, it took 14,000 time
steps for the blue ants to go extinct. but at 0 altruism i don't
think they would . . .

--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "wallyesterpaulrus"
<wallyesterpaulrus@y...> wrote:
> --- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@y...> wrote:
> > >it seems both fidelity and altruism probabilities have to be set
> > >quite high for the altruistic ants to survive . . .
> >
> > I didn't rigorously verify this, but I found that if fidelity
> > is set to 1, altruism prob. only determines how long it takes
> > for altruistic ants to dominate, even if they are initially in
> > the minority.
>
> ok, it seems you're right -- at 0.1 altruism, it took 14,000 time
> steps for the blue ants to go extinct. but at 0 altruism i don't
> think they would . . .

i started with 50 red and 50 blue . . .