Display:
the landscape changes as evolution progresses. _

This is very important.  

What this means is the local minima/maxima of the Agents in a fitness landscape can remain "the same" in relative terms but "improve" in overall terms by raising the fitness landscape.  To illustrate:  If A is at 2 and B is at 3 and the landscape is at 1 then the total of A is 3 and B at 4.  "Improving" the fitness landscape to 3 means A is now at 4 and B at 5.  The relative distance of A to B is remains the same but the objective net increase _is 2 although you can't determine it by comparing A and B.

Another way to put it:  a rising tide lifts all boats.

by ATinNM on Wed Nov 23rd, 2005 at 12:23:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Another way to put it: everyone needs to run faster just to stay in place.

And the point is not that the fitness landscape rises more or less rigidly, but that the shape of the lanscape changes, and even the dimensionality of the space. In other words, suddenly you find yourself solving a qualitatively different problem.

guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Nov 23rd, 2005 at 12:26:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]
To drop some terminology... you are talking about coevolution. Kauffman is concerned with speciation, and the role of neutral mutations.

guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Nov 23rd, 2005 at 12:44:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It was kind of you to respond as you did and not with the more blunt "ATinNM, you're blowing smoke up people's arses!"  8-)

Well.  Yeah.  Each of those are also possible.  

by ATinNM on Wed Nov 23rd, 2005 at 02:13:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series