Dataset Information

Making the most of potential: potential games and genotypic convergence.

ABSTRACT: We consider genotypic convergence of populations and show that under fixed fitness asexual and haploid sexual populations attain monomorphic convergence (even under genetic linkage between loci) to basins of attraction with locally exponential convergence rates; the same convergence obtains in single locus diploid sexual reproduction but to polymorphic populations. Furthermore, we show that there is a unified theory underlying these convergences: all of them can be interpreted as instantiations of players in a potential game implementing a multiplicative weights updating algorithm to converge to equilibrium, making use of the Baum-Eagon Theorem. To analyse varying environments, we introduce the concept of 'virtual convergence', under which, even if fixation is not attained, the population nevertheless achieves the fitness growth rate it would have had under convergence to an optimal genotype. Virtual convergence is attained by asexual, haploid sexual and multi-locus diploid reproducing populations, even if environments vary arbitrarily. We also study conditions for true monomorphic convergence in asexually reproducing populations in varying environments.

SUBMITTER: Edhan O

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8385380 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Making the most of potential: potential games and genotypic convergence.

Edhan Omer O Hellman Ziv Z Nehama Ilan I

Royal Society open science 20210825 8

We consider genotypic convergence of populations and show that under fixed fitness asexual and haploid sexual populations attain monomorphic convergence (even under genetic linkage between loci) to basins of attraction with locally exponential convergence rates; the same convergence obtains in single locus diploid sexual reproduction but to polymorphic populations. Furthermore, we show that there is a unified theory underlying these convergences: all of them can be interpreted as instantiations ...[more]

PMID: 34457339

Similar Datasets

Project description:Across a variety of contexts, adults tend to cooperate more with ingroup members than outgroup members. However, humans belong to multiple social groups simultaneously and we know little about how this cross-categorization affects cooperative decision-making. Nationality and gender are two social categories that are ripe for exploration in this regard: They regularly intersect in the real world and we know that each affects cooperation in isolation. Here we explore two hypotheses concerning the effects of cross-categorization on cooperative decision-making. First, the additivity hypothesis (H1), which proposes that the effects of social categories are additive, suggesting that people will be most likely to cooperate with partners who are nationality and gender ingroup members. Second, the category dominance hypothesis (H2), which proposes that one category will outcompete the other in driving decision-making, suggesting that either nationality or gender information will be privileged in cooperative contexts. Secondarily, we test whether identification with-and implicit bias toward-nationality and gender categories predict decision-making. Indian and US Americans (N = 479), made decisions in two cooperative contexts-the Dictator and Prisoner's Dilemma Games-when paired with partners of all four social categories: Indian women and men, and US American women and men. Nationality exerted a stronger influence than gender: people shared and cooperated more with own-nationality partners and believed that own-nationality partners would be more cooperative. Both identification with-and implicit preferences for-own-nationality, led to more sharing in the Dictator Game. Our findings are most consistent with H2, suggesting that when presented simultaneously, nationality, but not gender, exerts an important influence on cooperative decision-making. Our study highlights the importance of testing cooperation in more realistic intergroup contexts, ones in which multiple social categories are in play.

Project description:BackgroundSerious games are now widely used in many contexts, including psychological research and clinical use. One area of growing interest is that of cognitive assessment, which seeks to measure different cognitive functions such as memory, attention, and perception. Measuring these functions at both the population and individual levels can inform research and indicate health issues. Attention is an important function to assess, as an accurate measure of attention can help diagnose many common disorders, such as attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and dementia. However, using games to assess attention poses unique problems, as games inherently manipulate attention through elements such as sound effects, graphics, and rewards, and research on adding game elements to assessments (ie, gamification) has shown mixed results. The process for developing cognitive tasks is robust, with high psychometric standards that must be met before these tasks are used for assessment. Although games offer more diverse approaches for assessment, there is no standard for how they should be developed or evaluated.ObjectiveTo better understand the field and provide guidance to interdisciplinary researchers, we aim to answer the question: How are digital games used for the cognitive assessment of attention made and measured?MethodsWe searched several databases for papers that described a digital game used to assess attention that could be deployed remotely without specialized hardware. We used Rayyan, a systematic review software, to screen the records before conducting a systematic review.ResultsThe initial database search returned 49,365 papers. Our screening process resulted in a total of 74 papers that used a digital game to measure cognitive functions related to attention. Across the studies in our review, we found three approaches to making assessment games: gamifying cognitive tasks, creating custom games based on theories of cognition, and exploring potential assessment properties of commercial games. With regard to measuring the assessment properties of these games (eg, how accurately they assess attention), we found three approaches: comparison to a traditional cognitive task, comparison to a clinical diagnosis, and comparison to knowledge of cognition; however, most studies in our review did not evaluate the game's properties (eg, if participants enjoyed the game).ConclusionsOur review provides an overview of how games used for the assessment of attention are developed and evaluated. We further identified three barriers to advancing the field: reliance on assumptions, lack of evaluation, and lack of integration and standardization. We then recommend the best practices to address these barriers. Our review can act as a resource to help guide the field toward more standardized approaches and rigorous evaluation required for the widespread adoption of assessment games.

Dataset Information

Making the most of potential: potential games and genotypic convergence.

Publications

Making the most of potential: potential games and genotypic convergence.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets