Back

An Agent-based model of the gradual emergence of modern linguistic complexity

Ruland, M.; Andirko, A.; Romanowska, I.; Boeckx, C.

2020-11-15 animal behavior and cognition
10.1101/2020.11.12.380683 bioRxiv
Show abstract

A central question in the evolution of human language is whether it emerged as a result of one specific event or from a mosaic-like constellation of different phenomena and their interactions. Three potential processes have been identified by recent research as the potential primum mobile for the origins of modern linguistic complexity: Self-domestication, characterized by a reduction in reactive aggression and often associated with a gracilization of the face; changes in early brain development manifested by globularization of the skull; and demographic expansion of H. sapiens during the Middle Pleistocene. We developed an agent-based model to investigate how these three factors influence transmission of information within a population. Our model shows that there is an optimal degree of both hostility and mental capacity at which the amount of transmitted information is the largest. It also shows that linguistic communities formed within the population are strongest under circumstances where individuals have high levels of cognitive capacity available for information processing and there is at least a certain degree of hostility present. In contrast, we find no significant effects related to population size.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
● 235 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
11.8%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
● 72 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.6%
Similar papers in this journal
3
eLife
● 5828 papers in training set
Top 14%
7.8%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
● 393 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
7.8%
Similar papers in this journal
5
Animal Behaviour
○ 73 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.6%
Similar papers in this journal
6
Royal Society Open Science
● 214 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.6%
50% of probability mass above
7
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 7%
5.4%
8
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
● 51 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.4%
9
iScience
○ 1154 papers in training set
Top 6%
3.4%
10
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 33%
3.2%
11
Journal of Theoretical Biology
○ 162 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.4%
12
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 43%
2.1%
13
Biosystems
○ 31 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
14
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
● 2444 papers in training set
Top 28%
1.7%
15
Peer Community Journal
● 281 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
16
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology
○ 39 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.5%
17
Ecology and Evolution
○ 267 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.3%
18
Physical Biology
○ 46 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.1%
19
The American Naturalist
● 125 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
20
PeerJ
◐ 308 papers in training set
Top 9%
1.0%
21
Oikos
○ 84 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
22
Journal of Animal Ecology
○ 75 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
23
Science Advances
● 1243 papers in training set
Top 34%
0.6%
24
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
○ 176 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
25
Evolutionary Ecology
○ 15 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.6%
26
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
○ 69 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.6%
27
F1000Research
○ 88 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.