MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Nature of the Organism: Life Has a Life of Its Own

2000· article· en· W2068906229 on OpenAlexafffund
Daniel R. Brooks

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
Canadian institutionsToronto ZooUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOrganismDarwin (ADL)Closure (psychology)EpistemologySelection (genetic algorithm)Diversity (politics)Perspective (graphical)Survival of the fittestBiologySociologyEvolutionary biologyEcologyComputer sciencePhilosophyGeneticsPolitical scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The question of closure in biological systems is central to understanding the origins of the biological variation and complexity upon which various forms of selection act. Much of evolutionary theory, especially in the second half of the twentieth century, is concerned with the consequences of environmental selection acting on bio-diversity, but neglects questions of the origin of that diversity. This has permitted us to act as if an explanation of consequences was the ultimate explanation in biology. However, Darwin understood that evolution was both information driven and information constrained. The link between evolutionary constraints and closure can be profitably explored by starting with Darwin's notion of the primary of "the nature of the organism" over "the nature of the conditions" articulated in the sixth edition of Origin of Species. Contemporary ideas of self-organization, emergence, complexity, and inherent (developmental and phylogenetic) constraints can be seen as an elaboration and refinement of Darwin's views if we adopt the following perspective: (1) information is cheap, not costly, to produce, but may have costly consequences; and (2) information is produced by systems that are informationally closed but remain thermodynamically open.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.581
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the New York Academy of SciencesSame topicEvolutionary Game Theory and CooperationFrench-language works237,207