↓ Skip to main content

Simplification, Innateness, and the Absorption of Meaning from Context: How Novelty Arises from Gradual Network Evolution

Overview of attention for article published in Evolutionary Biology, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#45 of 336)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
28 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
Title
Simplification, Innateness, and the Absorption of Meaning from Context: How Novelty Arises from Gradual Network Evolution
Published in
Evolutionary Biology, March 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11692-017-9407-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adi Livnat

Abstract

How does new genetic information arise? Traditional thinking holds that mutation happens by accident and then spreads in the population by either natural selection or random genetic drift. There have been at least two fundamental conceptual problems with imagining an alternative. First, it seemed that the only alternative is a mutation that responds "smartly" to the immediate environment; but in complex multicellulars, it is hard to imagine how this could be implemented. Second, if there were mechanisms of mutation that "knew" what genetic changes would be favored in a given environment, this would have only begged the question of how they acquired that particular knowledge to begin with. This paper offers an alternative that avoids these problems. It holds that mutational mechanisms act on information that is in the genome, based on considerations of simplicity, parsimony, elegance, etc. (which are different than fitness considerations). This simplification process, under the performance pressure exerted by selection, not only leads to the improvement of adaptations but also creates elements that have the capacity to serve in new contexts they were not originally selected for. Novelty, then, arises at the system level from emergent interactions between such elements. Thus, mechanistically driven mutation neither requires Lamarckian transmission nor closes the door on novelty, because the changes it implements interact with one another globally in surprising and beneficial ways. Finally, I argue, for example, that genes used together are fused together; that simplification leads to complexity; and that evolution and learning are conceptually linked.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 48 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 22%
Student > Bachelor 7 14%
Researcher 7 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 6%
Other 2 4%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 14 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 29%
Computer Science 10 20%
Psychology 3 6%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 15 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 January 2022.
All research outputs
#2,223,762
of 25,721,020 outputs
Outputs from Evolutionary Biology
#45
of 336 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,023
of 322,508 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Evolutionary Biology
#2
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,721,020 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 336 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 322,508 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.