Skip to main content

Evolutionary Mechanisms

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Simulating Social Complexity

Part of the book series: Understanding Complex Systems ((UCS))

Abstract

After an introduction, the abstract idea of evolution is analysed into four processes which are illustrated with respect to a simple evolutionary game. A brief history of evolutionary ideas in the social sciences is given, illustrating the different ways in which the idea of evolution has been used. The technique of Genetic Algorithms (GA) is then described and discussed including the representation of the problem and the composition of the initial population, the Fitness Function, the reproduction process, the Genetic Operators, issues of convergence and some generalisations of the approach including endogenising the evolutionary process. Genetic Programming (GP) and Classifier Systems (CS) are also briefly introduced as potential developments of GA. Four detailed examples of social science applications of evolutionary techniques are then presented: the use of GA in the Arifovic “cobweb” model, using CS in a model of price setting developed by Moss, the role of GP in understanding decision-making processes in a stock market model and relating evolutionary ideas to social science in a model of survival for “strict” churches. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the prospects and difficulties of using the idea of biological evolution in the social sciences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For details about this, see any good textbook on biology (e.g. Dobzhansky et al. 1977).

  2. 2.

    A cobweb model is one in which the amount produced in a market must be chosen before market prices are observed. It is intended to explain why prices might be subject to periodic fluctuations in certain types of markets.

  3. 3.

    In fact, it might be argued that it is the only one. Rational choice cannot contend with novelty or the origin of social order. By focusing on relative performance, no matter how absolutely poor, evolution can produce order from randomness.

  4. 4.

    This independence comes both from other social actors and physical processes like climate and erosion.

  5. 5.

    This is probably because the market is spatially distributed, and the only way of making additional profits is by opening more branches (with associated costs). There are no major economies of scale to be exploited as when the kettle factory simply gets bigger and bigger with all customers continuing to bear the transport costs.

  6. 6.

    More informally, “the assumptions you don’t realise you are making are the ones that will do you in”.

  7. 7.

    In a way, it is a black mark against simulation that this needs to be said. Nobody would dream of designing a piece of statistical or ethnographic work without reference to the availability or accessibility of data!

  8. 8.

    http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/

References

  • Antoinisse, H. (1991). A grammar based Genetic Algorithm. In G. Rawlins (Ed.), Foundations of Genetic Algorithms: Proceedings of the first workshop on the foundations of Genetic Algorithms and Classifier Systems, Indiana University, 15-18 July 1990 (pp. 193–204). San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arifovic, J. (1994). Genetic Algorithm learning and the cobweb model. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 18, 3–28.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Arthur, W.B., Holland, J.H., LeBaron, B., Palmer, R., & Tayler, P. (1997). Asset pricing under endogenous expectations in an artificial stock market. In W. B. Arthur, S. N. Durlauf, & D. A. Lane (Eds.), The economy as a complex evolving system II, Santa Fe Institute Studies in the Science of Complexity, proceedings (Vol. XXVII, pp. 15–44). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, G. (1976). Altruism, egoism and genetic fitness: Economics and sociobiology. Journal of Economic Literature, 14, 817–826.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belew, R. (1989). When both individuals and populations search: Adding simple learning to the Genetic Algorithm. In J. Schaffer (Ed.), Proceedings of the third international conference on Genetic Algorithms, George Mason University, 4-7 June 1989 (pp. 34–41). San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belew, R. (1990). Evolution, learning and culture: Computational metaphors for adaptive search. Complex Systems, 4, 11–49.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Blackmore, S. (1999). The meme machine. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boorman, S., & Levitt, P. (1980). The genetics of altruism. St Louis, MO: Academic Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (1985). Culture and the evolutionary process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M. (2015). Evolutionary psychology: The new science of the mind (5th ed.). London: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calvin, W. (1996a). How brains think: Evolving intelligence, then and now. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calvin, W. (1996b). The cerebral code: Thinking a thought in the mosaics of the mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. T. (1965). Variation and selective retention in socio-cultural evolution. In H. R. Barringer, G. I. Blanksten, & R. W. Mack (Eds.), Social change in developing areas: A reinterpretation of evolutionary theory (pp. 19–49). Cambridge, MA: Schenkman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. T. (1974). Evolutionary epistemology. In P. A. Schlipp (Ed.), The philosophy of Karl R. Popper, The library of living philosophers (Vol. XIV, pp. 412–463). LaSalle, IL: Open Court.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cavalli-Sforza, L., & Feldman, M. (1973). Cultural versus biological inheritance: Phenotypic transmission from parents to children. Human Genetics, 25, 618–637.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chattoe, E., & Gilbert, N. (1997). A simulation of adaptation mechanisms in budgetary decision making. In R. Conte, R. Hegselmann, & P. Terna (Eds.), Simulating social phenomena, Lecture notes in economics and mathematical systems (Vol. 456, pp. 401–418). Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Chattoe, E. (1998). Just how (un)realistic are evolutionary algorithms as representations of social processes? Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 1(3), 2. http://www.soc.surrey.ac.uk/JASSS/1/3/2.html

  • Chattoe, E. (1999, June 7–9). A co-evolutionary simulation of multi-branch enterprises. Paper presented at the European Meeting on Applied Evolutionary Economics, Grenoble. http://webu2.upmf-grenoble.fr/iepe/textes/chatoe2.PDF

  • Chattoe, E. (2002). Developing the selectionist paradigm in sociology. Sociology, 36, 817–833.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chattoe, E. (2006a). Using simulation to develop and test functionalist explanations: A case study of dynamic church membership. British Journal of Sociology, 57, 379–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chattoe, E. (2006b). Using evolutionary analogies in social science: Two case studies. In A. Wimmer & R. Kössler (Eds.), Understanding change: Models, methodologies and metaphors (pp. 89–98). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Chattoe-Brown, E. (2009). The implications of different analogies between biology and society for effective functionalist analysis (Draft paper). Department of Sociology, University of Leicester, Leicester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cloak, F. T. (1975). Is a cultural ethology possible? Human Ecology, 3, 161–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costall, A. (1991). The meme meme. Cultural Dynamics, 4, 321–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Csányi, V. (1989). Evolutionary systems and society: A general theory of life, mind and culture. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darwin, C. R. (1859). On the origin of species by means of natural selection. London: John Murray.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dautenhahn, K., & Nehaniv, C. L. (Eds.). (2002). Imitation in animals and artifacts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawkins, R. (1976). The selfish gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawkins, R. (1982). Organisms, groups and memes: Replicators or vehicles? In R. Dawkins (Ed.), The extended phenotype. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawkins, R. (1993). Viruses of the mind. In B. Dahlbohm (Ed.), Dennett and his critics (pp. 13–27). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennett, D. (1990). Memes and the exploitation of imagination. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 48, 127–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dobzhansky, T., Ayala, F. J., Stebbins, G. L., & Valentine, J. W. (1977). Evolution. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dosi, G., Marengo, L., Bassanini, A., & Valente, M. (1999). Norms as emergent properties of adaptive learning: The case of economic routines. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 9, 5–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edelman, G. (1992). Bright air, brilliant fire: On the matter of the mind. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edmonds, B. (2002). Exploring the value of prediction in an artificial stock market. In V. M. Butz, O. Sigaud, & P. Gérard (Eds.), Anticipatory behaviour in adaptive learning systems, Lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 2684, pp. 285–296). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edmonds, B., & Moss, S. (2001). The importance of representing cognitive processes in multi-agent models. In G. Dorffner, H. Bischof, & K. Hornik (Eds.), Artificial neural networks: ICANN 2001, International Conference Vienna, Austria, August 21–25, 2001, Proceedings, Lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 2130, pp. 759–766). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, J. M. (2007). Generative social science: Studies in agent-based computational modelling. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fagin, R., Halpern, J., Moses, Y., & Vardi, M. (1995). Reasoning about knowledge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Forrest, S. (1991). Parallelism and programming in Classifier Systems. London: Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, D. P., & Felleisen, M. (1987). The little LISPER. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, N., & Troitzsch, K. G. (2005). Simulation for the social scientist (2nd ed.). Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, N. (2007). Agent-based models, Quantitative applications in the social sciences (Vol. 153). London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, D. E., Deb, K., & Korb, B. (1990). Messy Genetic Algorithms revisited: Studies in mixed size and scale. Complex Systems, 4, 415–444.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, D. E. (1989). Genetic Algorithms in search, optimization and machine learning. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Grefenstette, J., Gopal, R., Rosmaita, B., & Van Gucht, D. (1985). Genetic Algorithms for the travelling salesman problem. In J. Grefenstette (Ed.), Proceedings of the first international conference on Genetic Algorithms and Their Applications, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, 24-26 July 1985 (pp. 160–168). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1993). Organizational ecology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, I. (1993). Evolutionary robotics and SAGA: The case for hill crawling and tournament selection. In C. G. Langton (Ed.), Artificial Life III: Proceedings of the workshop on Artificial Life, Santa Fe, New Mexico, June 1992 (pp. 299–326). Boston: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haynes, T., Schoenefeld, D., & Wainwright, R. (1996). Type inheritance in strongly typed Genetic Programming. In P. J. Angeline & J. E. Kinnear (Eds.), Advances in Genetic Programming 2 (pp. 359–376). Boston, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heyes, C. M., & Plotkin, H. C. (1989). Replicators and interactors in cultural evolution. In M. Ruse (Ed.), What the philosophy of biology is: Essays dedicated to David Hull. Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson, G. (1993). Economics and evolution: Bringing life back into economics. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hoenigswald, H. M., & Wiener, L. S. (1987). Biological metaphor and cladistics classification. London: Francis Pinter.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Holland, J. H. (1975). Adaptation in natural and artificial systems. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, A. (1988). Evolution and human kinship. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull, D. L. (1982). The naked meme. In H. C. Plotkin (Ed.), Learning development and culture: Essays in evolutionary epistemology. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull, D. L. (1988). Interactors versus vehicles. In H. C. Plotkin (Ed.), The role of behaviour in evolution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iannaccone, L. (1994). Why strict churches are strong. American Journal of Sociology, 99, 1180–1211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kampis, G. (1991). Self-modifying systems in biology: A new framework for dynamics, information and complexity. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kauffman, S. A. (1993). The origins of order, self-organization and selection in evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koza, J. R. (1991). Evolving a computer program to generate random numbers using the Genetic Programming paradigm. In R. Belew & L. Booker (Eds.), Proceedings of the fourth international conference on Genetic Algorithms, UCSD, San Diego 13-16 July 1991 (pp. 37–44). San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koza, J. R. (1992a). Genetic Programming: On the Programming of Computers by Means of Natural Selection. Cambridge, MA: A Bradford Book/MIT Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Koza, J. R. (1992b). Genetic evolution and co-evolution of computer programmes. In C. Langton, C. Taylor, J. Farmer, & S. Rassmussen (Eds.), Artificial Life II: Proceedings of the workshop on Artificial Life, Santa Fe, New Mexico, February 1990 (pp. 603–629). Redwood City, CA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koza, J. R. (1992c). Evolution and co-evolution of computer programs to control independently acting agents. In J.-A. Meyer & S. Wilson (Eds.), From animals to animats: Proceedings of the first international conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behaviour (SAB 90), Paris, 24-28 September 1990 (pp. 366–375). Cambridge, MA: A Bradford Book/MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koza, J. R. (1992d). A genetic approach to econometric modelling. In P. Bourgine & B. Walliser (Eds.), Economics and cognitive science: Selected papers from the second international conference on Economics and Artificial Intelligence, Paris, 4-6 July 1990 (pp. 57–75). Oxford: Pergamon Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Koza, J. R. (1994). Genetic Programming II: Automatic discovery of reusable programs. Cambridge, MA: A Bradford Book/MIT Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kummer, H., Daston, L., Gigerenzer, G., & Silk, J. (1997). The social intelligence hypothesis. In P. Weingart, P. Richerson, S. D. Mitchell, & S. Maasen (Eds.), Human by nature: Between biology and the social sciences (pp. 157–179). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lomborg, B. (1996). Nucleus and shield: The evolution of social structure in the Iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma. American Sociological Review, 61, 278–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, A. (1996). Thought contagion, How belief spreads through society: The new science of memes. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macy, M. (1996). Natural selection and social learning in the Prisoner’s Dilemma: Co-adaptation with Genetic Algorithms and Artificial Neural Networks. Sociological Methods and Research, 25, 103–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinez-Jaramillo, S. (2007). Artificial financial markets: An agent based approach to reproduce stylized facts and to study the Red Queen Effect (PhD Thesis). Centre for Computational Finance and Economic Agents (CCFEA), University of Essex, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Metcalfe, J. (Ed.). (1994). Metacognition: Knowing about knowing. Cambridge, MA: A Bradford Book/MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, M. (1996). An introduction to Genetic Algorithms. Cambridge, MA: A Bradford Book/MIT Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Moran, P. A. P. (1962). The statistical processes of evolutionary theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Moss, S. (1992). Artificial Intelligence models of complex economic systems. In S. Moss & J. Rae (Eds.), Artificial Intelligence and economic analysis: Prospects and problems (pp. 25–42). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. R., & Winter Jr., S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Oliphant, M. (1996). The development of Saussurean communication. BioSystems, 37, 31–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olivetti, C. (1994). Do Genetic Algorithms converge to economic equilibria? (Discussion Paper, 24). Department of Economics, University of Rome “La Sapienza”, Rome, Italy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K. R. (1979). Objective knowledge: An evolutionary approach. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reader, J. (1970). Man on Earth. London: Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Runciman, W. G. (1998). The selectionist paradigm and its implications for sociology. Sociology, 32, 163–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schraudolph, N., & Belew, R. (1992). Dynamic parameter encoding for Genetic Algorithms. Machine Learning, 9, 9–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, R., Forrest, S., & Perelson, A. (1992). Searching for diverse co-operative populations with Genetic Algorithms (TCGA Report, 92002). The Clearinghouse for Genetic Algorithms, Department of Engineering Mechanics, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarde, G. (1884). Darwinisme naturel et Darwinisme social. Revue Philosophique, XVII, 607–637.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarde, G. (1903). The laws of imitation. New York: Henry Holt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vega-Redondo, F. (1996). Evolution, games and economic behaviour. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Weibull, J. (1995). Evolutionary game theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Westoby, A. (1994) The ecology of intentions: How to make memes and influence people: Culturology. http://ase.tufts.edu/cogstud/papers/ecointen.htm.

  • Whitley, D. (1989). The GENITOR algorithm and selection pressure: Why rank-based allocation of reproductive trials is best. In J. Schaffer (Ed.), Proceedings of the third international conference on Genetic Algorithms, George Mason University, 4-7 June 1989 (pp. 116–121). San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, E. O. (1975). Sociobiology: The new synthesis. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Windrum, P., & Birchenhall, C. (1998). Developing simulation models with policy relevance: Getting to grips with UK science policy. In P. Ahrweiler & N. Gilbert (Eds.), Computer simulations in science and technology studies (pp. 183–206). Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Edmund Chattoe-Brown acknowledges the financial support of the Economic and Social Research Council as part of the SIMIAN (http://www.simian.ac.uk) node of the National Centre for Research Methods (http://www.ncrm.ac.uk).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Edmund Chattoe-Brown .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Further Reading

Further Reading

Gilbert and Troitzsch (2005) is a good general introduction to social science simulation and deals with evolutionary techniques explicitly, while Gilbert (2007) is recommended as an introduction to this kind of simulation for studying evolution in social systems. For deeper introductions to the basic techniques, see Goldberg (1989), which is still an excellent introduction to GA despite its age (for a more up-to-date introduction, see Mitchell (1996), and Koza (1992a, 1994)) for a very accessible explanation of GP with lots of examples. Forrest (1991) is a good introduction to techniques in Classifier Systems.

More details about the four example models are given in the following: Chattoe (2006a) shows how a simulation using an evolutionary approach can be related to mainstream social science issues, Edmonds (2002) gives an example of the application of a GP-based simulation to an economic case, and Moss (1992) is a relatively rare example of a classifier-based model.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Chattoe-Brown, E., Edmonds, B. (2017). Evolutionary Mechanisms. In: Edmonds, B., Meyer, R. (eds) Simulating Social Complexity. Understanding Complex Systems. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66948-9_21

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66948-9_21

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-66947-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-66948-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics