Ted,
Perhaps I havent been following this thread closely enough to put my oar in,
but the following passage caught my eye:
"The remarkable thing about the flocking models, such as the one in JASS, is
that they show that leadership doesn't have to be due to an internal trait. It
may simply be a situational difference among very similar agents. Before these
models were put forth, the prevailing view was that leadership is always
endogenous to the leader. Now, at least, we can consider other possibilities,
whether or not they end up being correct."
Think about this passage as if the "boids" were cells in a early developing
embryo. EVERY cell is exactly the same, yet some become leaders. We will be
talking about this next fall in a CUSF seminar on epigenisis.
Nick
Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology,
Clark University ([email protected])
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
http://www.cusf.org [City University of Santa Fe]
----- Original Message -----
From: Ted Carmichael
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Sent: 4/10/2010 4:39:22 AM
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] leadership in flocks
I haven't read the papers all the way through, but on first blush, I don't see
them as contradictory. Either could be correct.
A "leader" - whether bird or person - could act first due to internal traits
(inclination, ability, imagination) or external influence. The first implies
that the leader is different from the others in some way, while the second
implies only a situational difference: circumstance rather than inherent traits.
Once the leader acts, this creates space for the other birds/people to act
similarly, and follow the leader. The followers must have had the same
inclination towards this action, because they end up doing it, too ... they
just weren't over the tipping point yet. There was something missing that kept
them from acting first. The leader's action clearly provides the missing
element, and so all the followers perform the same action.
The remarkable thing about the flocking models, such as the one in JASS, is
that they show that leadership doesn't have to be due to an internal trait. It
may simply be a situational difference among very similar agents. Before these
models were put forth, the prevailing view was that leadership is always
endogenous to the leader. Now, at least, we can consider other possibilities,
whether or not they end up being correct.
-t
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 8:57 PM, glen e. p. ropella
<[email protected]> wrote:
sarbajit roy wrote circa 10-04-09 06:34 AM:
> The religious grouping I belong to had cause to study/discuss this about 150
> years back (concerning flocks of men not birds). The leader of the faction
> in opposition to mine (which means my faction vehemently disagrees with his
> view) had this to say
That quote from your opposition seems to fall in line with the nature
article, the idea that particular birds/humans (presumably with
particular traits, inbred or learned) turn out to be leaders. I take it
from your statement that you agree more with the jasss article, that
leaders with no particularly exceptional traits emerge? Right?
Of course, to even have this discussion, we have to allow ourselves the
metaphor between human cliques and bird flocks...
--
glen e. p. ropella, 971-222-9095, http://agent-based-modeling.com
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
