Dynamics of Decision Making in Animal Group Motion

Nabet, Benjamin; Leonard, Naomi Ehrich; Couzin, Iain D.; Levin, Simon A.

doi:10.1007/s00332-008-9038-6

Cited by 61 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The first efforts in this vein focused on testing the hypothesis in mobile animal groups, using strongly schooling golden shiner fish, and more generally on the nature of consensus within animal populations searching for targets, but where there is no variability in terms of how strongly opinions are held (111,(117)(118)(119). A major conclusion is that, although leaders obviously are important, the unopinionated are also crucial to the consensus in their ability to connect the population, and to shift momentum from one direction to the other.…”

Section: Collective Phenomena and Collective Decision-makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public goods in relation to competition, cooperation, and spite

Levin

2014

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public goods and common-pool resources are fundamental features of biological and social systems, and pose core challenges in achieving sustainability; for such situations, the immediate interests of individuals and the societies in which they are embedded are in potential conflict, involving game-theoretic considerations whose resolution need not serve the collective good. Evolution has often confronted such dilemmas-e.g., in bacterial biofilms-in the challenges of cancer, in nitrogen fixation and chelation, in the production of antibiotics, and in collective action problems across animal groups; there is much to learn from the Darwinian resolution of these situations for how to address problems our societies face today. Addressing these problems involves understanding the emergence of cooperative agreements, from reciprocal altruism and insurance arrangements to the social norms and more formal institutions that maintain societies. At the core are the issues of how individuals and societies discount the future and the interests of others, and the degree that individual decisions are influenced by regard for others. Ultimately, as Garrett Hardin suggested, the solution to problems of the commons is in "mutual coercion, mutually agreed upon," and hence in how groups of individuals form and how they arrive at decisions that ultimately benefit all.prosociality | collective phenomena | complex adaptive systems

show abstract

Section: Collective Phenomena and Collective Decision-makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public goods in relation to competition, cooperation, and spite

Levin

2014

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Behavioural ecology is another important expanding area of research. How insect swarms, bird flocks, schools of fish, animals and so on reach community decisions is another exciting, relatively new, fast growing area: see, for example, Simpson et al [71], Buhl et al [72] and Nabet et al [73].…”

Section: Concluding Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vignettes from the field of mathematical biology: the application of mathematics to biology and medicine

Murray

2012

Interface Focus.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The application of mathematical models in biology and medicine has a long history. From the sparse number of papers in the first half of the twentieth century with a few scientists working in the field it has become vast with thousands of active researchers. We give a brief, and far from definitive history, of how some parts of the field have developed and how the type of research has changed. We describe in more detail just two examples of specific models which are directly related to real biological problems, namely animal coat patterns and the growth and image enhancement of glioblastoma brain tumours.

show abstract

“…However, we can still use (18) to provide a finite-gain result for the closed-loop system (where a bias term is included). In fact…”

Section: State Space Formalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…, N . Model (39) describes a biologically plausible mechanism for decision-making behavior in planar groups in motion, when there are informed subgroups with conflicting information [18].…”

Section: Examples and Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Robustness of Aggregation in Networked Dynamical Systems

Scardovi

Leonard

2009

Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Robotic Communication and Coordination

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-In this paper we study robustness of aggregation in networks of coupled identical systems driven by possibly different external inputs. This property is guaranteed by providing a finite L2 gain condition for the closed-loop system. We show, for a class of systems, how robustness depends on the connectivity of the underlying communication graph. Applications range from coordination problems where there are conflicting objectives to the study of aggregation phenomena where perturbations of the nominal systems must be taken into account. Both scenarios arise in networks of biological and engineered coordinating systems.

show abstract

Dynamics of Decision Making in Animal Group Motion

Cited by 61 publications

References 16 publications

Public goods in relation to competition, cooperation, and spite

Public goods in relation to competition, cooperation, and spite

Vignettes from the field of mathematical biology: the application of mathematics to biology and medicine

Robustness of Aggregation in Networked Dynamical Systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About