The Emergence of Complex Hierarchical Hub Social Network in the Mesa Verde Village Simulation Using Cultural Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper we extend the cultural framework previously developed for the Village multi-agent simulation in Swarm to include the emergence of a hub network from two base networks. The first base network is kinship, over which generalized reciprocal exchange is defined, and the second is the economic network where agents carry out balanced reciprocal exchange. Agents, or households, are able to procure several resources. We use Cultural Algorithms as a framework for the emergence of social intelligence at both individual and cultural levels. Successful agents on both networks can promote themselves to be included in the hub network where they can develop exchange links to other hubs. The collective effect of the hub network is representative of the quality of life in the population and serves as indicator for motives behind the mysterious emigration from the region. Knowledge represents the development and use of exchange relationships between agents. The presence of defectors on the hub network improved resilience of the social system while maintaining the population size as that observed where no defectors were present. This suggests a tendency for the social system to favor larger hub formations over less social individuals or those with weaker ties.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".