Fitness Beats Truth in the Evolution of Perception

IF 1.4 4区 生物学 Q4 MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY
Chetan Prakash, Kyle D. Stephens, Donald D. Hoffman, Manish Singh, Chris Fields
{"title":"Fitness Beats Truth in the Evolution of Perception","authors":"Chetan Prakash,&nbsp;Kyle D. Stephens,&nbsp;Donald D. Hoffman,&nbsp;Manish Singh,&nbsp;Chris Fields","doi":"10.1007/s10441-020-09400-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Does natural selection favor veridical percepts—those that accurately (if not exhaustively) depict objective reality? Perceptual and cognitive scientists standardly claim that it does. Here we formalize this claim using the tools of evolutionary game theory and Bayesian decision theory. We state and prove the “Fitness-Beats-Truth (FBT) Theorem” which shows that the claim is false: If one starts with the assumption that perception involves inference to states of the objective world, then the FBT Theorem shows that a strategy that simply seeks to maximize expected-fitness payoff, with no attempt to estimate the “true” world state, does consistently better. More precisely, the FBT Theorem provides a quantitative measure of the extent to which the <i>fitness-only</i> strategy dominates the <i>truth</i> strategy, and of how this dominance increases with the size of the perceptual space. The FBT Theorem supports the <i>Interface</i> <i>Theory</i> <i>of</i> <i>Perception</i> (e.g. Hoffman et al. in Psychon Bull Rev https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0890-8, 2015), which proposes that our perceptual systems have evolved to provide a species-specific interface to guide adaptive behavior, and not to provide a veridical representation of objective reality.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7057,"journal":{"name":"Acta Biotheoretica","volume":"69 3","pages":"319 - 341"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s10441-020-09400-0","citationCount":"23","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Biotheoretica","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10441-020-09400-0","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 23

Abstract

Does natural selection favor veridical percepts—those that accurately (if not exhaustively) depict objective reality? Perceptual and cognitive scientists standardly claim that it does. Here we formalize this claim using the tools of evolutionary game theory and Bayesian decision theory. We state and prove the “Fitness-Beats-Truth (FBT) Theorem” which shows that the claim is false: If one starts with the assumption that perception involves inference to states of the objective world, then the FBT Theorem shows that a strategy that simply seeks to maximize expected-fitness payoff, with no attempt to estimate the “true” world state, does consistently better. More precisely, the FBT Theorem provides a quantitative measure of the extent to which the fitness-only strategy dominates the truth strategy, and of how this dominance increases with the size of the perceptual space. The FBT Theorem supports the Interface Theory of Perception (e.g. Hoffman et al. in Psychon Bull Rev https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0890-8, 2015), which proposes that our perceptual systems have evolved to provide a species-specific interface to guide adaptive behavior, and not to provide a veridical representation of objective reality.

Abstract Image

在感知的进化中,健康胜过真理
自然选择是否有利于真实的感知——那些准确(如果不是详尽)描述客观现实的感知?感知和认知科学家标准地宣称它确实存在。在这里,我们使用进化博弈论和贝叶斯决策理论的工具将这一说法形式化。我们陈述并证明了“适合度战胜真相(FBT)定理”,这表明这种说法是错误的:如果一开始假设感知涉及对客观世界状态的推断,那么FBT定理表明,一种简单地寻求最大化预期适合度回报的策略,而不试图估计“真实”的世界状态,总是做得更好。更准确地说,FBT定理提供了一个定量的衡量标准,即仅适应度策略在多大程度上支配真理策略,以及这种支配地位如何随着感知空间的大小而增加。FBT定理支持感知的界面理论(例如Hoffman等人在Psychon Bull Revhttps://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0890-8,2015),提出我们的感知系统已经进化为提供一个特定物种的界面来指导自适应行为,而不是提供客观现实的真实表示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Acta Biotheoretica
Acta Biotheoretica 生物-生物学
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
7.70%
发文量
19
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Acta Biotheoretica is devoted to the promotion of theoretical biology, encompassing mathematical biology and the philosophy of biology, paying special attention to the methodology of formation of biological theory. Papers on all kind of biological theories are welcome. Interesting subjects include philosophy of biology, biomathematics, computational biology, genetics, ecology and morphology. The process of theory formation can be presented in verbal or mathematical form. Moreover, purely methodological papers can be devoted to the historical origins of the philosophy underlying biological theories and concepts. Papers should contain clear statements of biological assumptions, and where applicable, a justification of their translation into mathematical form and a detailed discussion of the mathematical treatment. The connection to empirical data should be clarified. Acta Biotheoretica also welcomes critical book reviews, short comments on previous papers and short notes directing attention to interesting new theoretical ideas.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信