Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Artificial Neural Networks Demonstrate the Evolution of Human Intelligence

Posted by Unknown on from the chicks-dig-cooperation dept.

samazon writes "Ph.D. students at Trinity College in Dublin have constructed an artificial neural network model to demonstrate the Machiavellian intelligence theory — that human intelligence evolved based on the need for social teamwork and indexing a variety of social relationships and statuses. (Abstract) The experiment involved programming a base group of 50 simulated 'brains' which were required to participate one of two classical game theory dilemmas — the Prisoner's Dilemma or the Snowdrift game. Upon completion of either game, each 'brain' produced 'offspring' asexually, with 'brains' that made more advantageous choices during the games programmed to have a better chance to reproduce. A potential random mutation during each generation changed the 'brain's structure, number of neurons, or the strengths of the connections between those neurons,' simulating the evolution of the social brain. After 50,000 generations, the model showed that as cooperation increased, so did the intelligence of the programmed brains." The full paper is available.

3 of 107 comments (clear)

  1. Now... by Like2Byte · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now *THAT's* intelligent design!

    $Ducks

    1. Re:Now... by PatDev · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I know you made a joke, but this right here is why believing in intelligent design and evolution etc are not necessarily incompatible with each other.

      No, it is not. They are incompatible.

      Intelligent Design comes in two forms. The first is when we admit that it is just a euphemism for creationism. In this case, the theory of evolution (as well as most of the field of archaeology) clearly contradicts the story of Genesis, thus rendering the two incompatible.

      The second is the form in which ID, in an attempt to distance itself from religion, rests upon the principle of irreducible complexity. The basic idea is that certain constructs represented in nature today (the human eye is an oft-used example) would have been useless in a less-complex or less specific form, and thus these traits would not have evolved (a half-formed eye is an evolutionary disadvantage, a being is better off not wasting the calories keeping that useless tissue alive). Since these traits could not develop through incremental changes, some traits must not evolve, but must have been put there by some intelligent agent.

      This second form is not so much a scientific theory as it is a fundamental misunderstanding of stochastic processes and the field of mathematical optimization. This form of ID is basically the claim that evolutionary optimization can never escape local optima to discover global optima - something a competent applied mathematician knows to be false.

  2. Re:Human intelligence ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Please reference previous comment. This clearly is designed to model intelligence in Tennessee. Now if we could just fast forward 50,000 generations...