Comments on: Genetics by the Poolside http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/jreyes/2007/07/08/genetics-by-the-poolside/ Education, design, society, and whatever else. Fri, 19 Dec 2008 18:19:13 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Josh http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/jreyes/2007/07/08/genetics-by-the-poolside/comment-page-1/#comment-6513 Josh Fri, 03 Aug 2007 16:56:50 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/jreyes/2007/07/08/genetics-by-the-poolside/#comment-6513 Actually, the algorithm demonstrated a lot of learning. If you want, I can send you an individual run. Then the relatedness is much more apparent. The fact that the fitness landscape is dynamic means that the fittest individuals that rise to power changes from run to run. Pretend the earth got destroyed twenty-something times. Evolution starts over each time, working its magic on a brand new randomly created population. I think it is known that no single strategy dominates in a finite PD tournament. In fact, you can see this qualitatively in my visualization above. That's what makes the PD so tricky. In a finite tournament, there's nothing to converge to. Instead, populations go through cycles. In the infinite case, Tit-for-Tat always wins. Check me on that, though. Nowak has some better strategies for finite tournaments. I'm only starting to get in the literature right now. Check back with me in a few weeks. Actually, the algorithm demonstrated a lot of learning. If you want, I can send you an individual run. Then the relatedness is much more apparent. The fact that the fitness landscape is dynamic means that the fittest individuals that rise to power changes from run to run. Pretend the earth got destroyed twenty-something times. Evolution starts over each time, working its magic on a brand new randomly created population.

I think it is known that no single strategy dominates in a finite PD tournament. In fact, you can see this qualitatively in my visualization above. That’s what makes the PD so tricky. In a finite tournament, there’s nothing to converge to. Instead, populations go through cycles. In the infinite case, Tit-for-Tat always wins. Check me on that, though. Nowak has some better strategies for finite tournaments. I’m only starting to get in the literature right now. Check back with me in a few weeks.

]]> By: lixin http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/jreyes/2007/07/08/genetics-by-the-poolside/comment-page-1/#comment-6247 lixin Tue, 17 Jul 2007 15:49:55 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/jreyes/2007/07/08/genetics-by-the-poolside/#comment-6247 i love it joshy! i think maxwell dworkin needs a new wallprint scheme... this shows less learning than my intuition expected. oh how i hope we're on each other's editorial boards for our respective future journal submissions... i love it joshy! i think maxwell dworkin needs a new wallprint scheme…

this shows less learning than my intuition expected. oh how i hope we’re on each other’s editorial boards for our respective future journal submissions…

]]>