I think of stigmergy as a niche construction that "constructs" back. Now I know that this is slightly different than the typical image where we picture stigmergy as an endofunctor on an agent's behavior, but I think it helps to explode-out what happens in that endofunctor. Stigmergy then ought to easily have the duality property that one might just as easily perceive the agents as an endofunctor on the behavior of an environment.
1. Some termites build a little bit of mound here and then there 2. A mounding threshold is met, and then 3. A "switch" is flipped in behavior of the termites that follow, or the mound's form signals to future termites, or (favorite dynamical jargon here), and 4. The termites are now set to go off to do some other task. OTOH, in theory, one can keep termites without mounds, but (computationally speaking) it is more difficult to have mounds without termites. Most salient to me is the desire to define locally (much like differentiation), stigmergy makes the most sense as a concept once a local perspective is chosen. The degree to which it can be generalized then becomes a topic analogous to differential geometry in that we can then attempt to extend to global properties from the local ones.
.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
