The model's interesting. The supplemental info can be found here:
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263665 But it leaves me with a bit of an allergic reaction. Most of the variables (status, inequality parameter, number of relationships). The proportion of status distributed, r, is an exception, I think. If you look at the code <https://github.com/johnbryden/PrestigeModel/blob/master/PrestigeModel.py>, you get a better sense of what these parameters actually mean. The grounding is still preemptive (by which I mean using words like "status" instead of words like "variable s" conflate model with referent), but it's easier to tell what's happening while reading the code than by reading the paper. Of course, the real kicker lies in validation (or the lack thereof). They clearly are trying to validate. But it would have been better if they called out explicit cases against which to falsify and validate, rather than letting the variable grounding do all that work preemptively. On 10/30/24 12:37, Jochen Fromm wrote:
A more recent article from him about "Modelling transitions between egalitarian, dynamic leader and absolutist power structures" can be found here https://www.stir.ac.uk/research/hub/publication/2041639
-- ꙮ Mɥǝu ǝlǝdɥɐuʇs ɟᴉƃɥʇ' ʇɥǝ ƃɹɐss snɟɟǝɹs˙ ꙮ -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam to (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/
