TOWARDS A GENERAL THEORY OF GROUP SELECTION
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The longstanding debate about the importance of group (multilevel) selection suffers from a lack of formal models that describe explicit selection events at multiple levels. Here, we describe a general class of models for two-level evolutionary processes which include birth and death events at both levels. The models incorporate the state-dependent rates at which these events occur. The models come in two closely related forms: (1) a continuous-time Markov chain, and (2) a partial differential equation (PDE) derived from (1) by taking a limit. We argue that the mathematical structure of this PDE is the same for all models of two-level population processes, regardless of the kinds of events featured in the model. The mathematical structure of the PDE allows for a simple and unambiguous way to distinguish between individual- and group-level events in any two-level population model. This distinction, in turn, suggests a new and intuitively appealing way to define group selection in terms of the effects of group-level events. We illustrate our theory of group selection by applying it to models of the evolution of cooperation and the evolution of simple multicellular organisms, and then demonstrate that this kind of group selection is not mathematically equivalent to individual-level (kin) selection.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it