Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Evolution of Discrimination (Experimental Ethics) Chung Tue “DuCK” Nguyen BSE (Hon.) Project Supervisors: Ann Nicholson, Kevin Korb.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Evolution of Discrimination (Experimental Ethics) Chung Tue “DuCK” Nguyen BSE (Hon.) Project Supervisors: Ann Nicholson, Kevin Korb."— Presentation transcript:

1 Evolution of Discrimination (Experimental Ethics) Chung Tue “DuCK” Nguyen BSE (Hon.) Project Supervisors: Ann Nicholson, Kevin Korb

2 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 2 Outline  Introduction & Motivation & Main goal  Related concepts  Experimental Design The world The agents  Observations & Results  Conclusion  References

3 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 3 Introduction & Motivation  Discrimination: The ability to recognise differences. The tendency to offer different treatement on the basis of those differences.  Positive: telling useful from harmful.  Negative: unfair treatement: racism, sexism, etc.  Does discrimination evolve?

4 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 4 Main goal  The goal of this study is: To observe the evolution of discriminatory tendencies in intelligent species through social interactions.

5 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 5 Related concepts  Evolutionary Theory Natural selection – survival of the fittest  Evolutionary Psychology Evolution of behaviours/mental traits  Baldwin Effect Roles of learning in evolution  Ethocentrism Ingroup hyper-evaluation Outgroup negative streotype  Iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma (IPD)  Alife Simulation

6 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 6 Experimental Design  Using simulations to study discrimination  Standard Alife setup: The world The agents

7 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 7 The world  A wrap-around board of n-by-m locations  Each location can contain an infinite number of agents

8 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 8 The agent  Chromosome: mutable genotype  Behaviour: flexible phenotype  Discrimination is modelled using chromosome and behaviour

9 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 9  Chromosome affects behaviour at birth.  Behaviour affects the tendency of possible actions.  Chromosome is modified through mutation.  Behaviour is modified through learning. Social learning (mimic) Individual learning (learning through pain/pleasure) Chromosome vs Behaviour

10 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 10 Chromosome, Behaviour and the Environment

11 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 11 Modelling discrimination  Chromosome: “discrimination gene”  Behaviour: “discriminatory behaviour”  Discrimination Preference Preferential genotype Preferential behaviour Measurable

12 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 12 Preferences  How positive/negative an agent “feels” about agents in his own group/the other group  Represenation: two numbers, each between 0 and 1  Two types of preferences: Ingroup preference: towards the ingroup Outgroup preference: towards the outgroup E.g.: Ingroup preference = 0.7, outgroup preference = 0.4  Preferential behaviours discriminatory actions

13 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 13 Preference test  Test for preference (ingroup/outgroup): Choose randomly: x in [0,1] Compare x with p x <= p : like x > p : dislike x =Test(preference) LikeDislike success failure p 01

14 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 14 Main genotypes  Based on the values of preferences (chromosome), there are 5 main genotypes, each may evolve differently. Out-group- pref. >0.5<0.5=0.5 In-group- pref. >0.5 Do-gooderSupremacist <0.5 BetrayerHaterBetrayer =0.5 Do-gooderHaterModerate

15 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 15 The agent (cont.) Other traits: Race (can also be: religion, ideology, etc.) Health Age Location Fitness = #children + 2 x #grandchildren

16 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 16 A typical cycle  During 1 cycle of the simulation, every agent can perform all actions, in the following order: Move Learn socially (mimic the best) Mate + reproduce Interact + learn through pain and pleasure Note: Agents don’t eat, health is affected directly through interaction

17 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 17 Preferences in action - Moving  Agents can move in four directions  Agents choose their location based on how much they like the majority of agents in a particular location.  Agents considers their current location as well as four cells around them.  Considerations are done in random order

18 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 18 Moving example In_pref = 0.8 Out_pref = 0.3 Majority = Red Test(Out_pref) = 0.4 Result: 0.4 > 0.3 => Failed In_pref = 0.8 Out_pref = 0.3 Majority = Blue Test(In_pref) = 0.6 Result: 0.6 > 0.8 => Success Note: much more likely to move in with its own kind

19 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 19 Preference in action – Social Learning (mimicking)  Agents learn from other agents in the same location  Agents learn from the race they like first  Agents learn from the agents the see as most successful (the idol)  Success = fitness x (maxAge – age)  Mimicking: Depends on s ocial learning success rate Change preferences towards the idol’s preferences

20 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 20 Preference in action – Mating  There is no gender  Inter-racial mating  Mating is consensual Consent is given on the basis of racial preference I.e. both partners must pass the preference test  Mating hapens locally

21 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 21 Reproduction  When mating is successful, a new agent is created in the same location as its parents  New agent has a 50-50 chance of getting: Either parent’s race Either parent’s ingroup preference (chromosome), or mutate Either parent’s outgroup preference (chromosome), or mutate  A small chance of mutation: Change the value to any x in [0,1]

22 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 22 Reproduction example Chromosome: 0.3/0.5 Behaviour: 0.6/0.9 Chromosome: 0.6/0.4 Behaviour: 0.3/0.5 Chromosome: 0.6/0.4 Behaviour: 0.3/0.7

23 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 23 Preference in action – Interaction & Indiv. Learning  Every agent interacts with another agent in the same location, randomly chosen.  Interaction is essentially an IPD* game: Each agent does a preference test on the other If success: the agent cooperates If failure: the agent defects Agent’s health is updated accordingly

24 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 24 Interaction trade-offs CooperateDefect Cooperate3 | Pleasure-3 | Pain Defect4 | Pleasure-2 | Pain A typical IPD is characterised with the following order of trade-offs: 1.Defect – Cooperate 2.Cooperate – Cooperate 3.Defect – Defect 4.Cooperate – Defect

25 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 25 Learning through pleasure and pain  Agents change their preference according to the result of their interaction with another agent.  If Pleasure: increase preference  If Pain: decrease preference  Preference test also applies: Only increase preference if success Only decrease preference if failure

26 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 26 Experiments  Difference between genotypes  Relationship between fitness and preference  Relationship between ingroup and outgroup preference  Population development and geographical distribution of the races

27 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 27 Experimental modes  Separated communities: Two races start in isolation  Mixed communities: Two race mixed together from the start

28 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 28 Running the simulation  Run 30 simulations in each experimental mode  Each simulation is 1000-cycle long  Starting population is 7000  World size: 50x50  All agents start off as “Moderate”: In_pref = Out_pref = 0.5

29 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 29 Results - Overview  The genotypes did evolve  Order of fitness (most -> least): Supremacist Do-gooder Hater Betrayer  Ethnocentric behaviours Most affected by the Supremacist and Do-gooder

30 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 30 Results - Overview  Separated communities different from mixed communities:  Separated: Less variations in genotype More variations in races Complete domination + extinction  Mixed: More variations in genotype Less variations in races Domination changes hands

31 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 31 Results - Experiment 1  Difference between genotypes Mixed communitiesSeparated communities

32 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 32 Results - Experiment 1 Mixed communitiesSeparated communities

33 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 33 Results – Experiment 2  Relationship between fitness and preference Correlations: Inpref-Fitness = 0.887, p = 0.01 Outpref-Fitness = -0.519, p = 0.01 Correlations: Inpref-Fitness = 0.920, p = 0.01 Outpref-Fitness = -0.660, p = 0.01 Mixed communitiesSeparated communities

34 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 34 Results – Experiment 3  Relationship between ingroup and outgroup preference Correlations: Inpref-Outpref = -0.750, p = 0.01 Correlations: Inpref-Outpref = -0.951, p = 0.01 Mixed communities Separated communities

35 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 35 Results – Experiment 3 Correlation: Inpref-Outpref = 0.736, p = 0.01 Correlations: Inpref-Outpref = -0.774, p = 0.01 Separated communities Mixed communities

36 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 36 Results – Experiment 4  Population development and geographical distribution of the races Mixed communitiesSeparated communities

37 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 37 Results – Experiment 4 Mixed communitiesSeparated communities Clear domination: 70% Extinction: 13.3% Clear domination: 46.6% Extinction: 0%

38 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 38 Results – Experiment 4 Separated communities Mixed communities

39 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 39 Results – Experiment 4 Separated communities Mixed communities

40 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 40 Results – Experiment 4  More geographical distribution if time permits…

41 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 41 Conclusion  Discrimination can be demonstrated to be evolutionary  A successful discriminatory strategy includes a reasonable level of cooperation and defection  Ingroup cooperation has more impact on fitness than outgroup defection: don’t have to love thine neighbours but don’t mess up with thine family  Ethnocentric behaviours may have been evolutionary  Mixed communities allow more variation and balanced competition. Think: multiculturalism, immigration…

42 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 42 Futher work  More + longer simulation Race domination will stabilised or lead to extinction eventually?  Increase separation space/time to observe development before and after contact (in separated communities mode)  More efficient simulation  Find a better way to observe geographical distribution of genotypes in 3D.  Thesis

43 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 43 References  Refer to References section in the Thesis

44 25/10/2006Evolution of Discrimination - Chung Tue "DuCK" Nguyen 44 Questions?  Thank you.


Download ppt "Evolution of Discrimination (Experimental Ethics) Chung Tue “DuCK” Nguyen BSE (Hon.) Project Supervisors: Ann Nicholson, Kevin Korb."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google