From c2e885c397eeb506ca60c0876acefe8998a75aa9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Karl Berry Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 17:34:04 +0000 Subject: afparticle (26aug14) git-svn-id: svn://tug.org/texlive/trunk@35046 c570f23f-e606-0410-a88d-b1316a301751 --- Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/Makefile | 60 + Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/README | 5 + .../texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/afparticle.pdf | Bin 0 -> 342347 bytes .../texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/afpsample.bib | 1213 ++++++++++++++++++++ .../texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/afpsample.pdf | Bin 0 -> 188689 bytes .../texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/afpsample.tex | 117 ++ .../texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/vitruvian.jpg | Bin 0 -> 63756 bytes 7 files changed, 1395 insertions(+) create mode 100644 Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/Makefile create mode 100644 Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/README create mode 100644 Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/afparticle.pdf create mode 100644 Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/afpsample.bib create mode 100644 Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/afpsample.pdf create mode 100644 Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/afpsample.tex create mode 100644 Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/vitruvian.jpg (limited to 'Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle') diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/Makefile b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/Makefile new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..a08cddf17e8 --- /dev/null +++ b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/Makefile @@ -0,0 +1,60 @@ +# +# Makefile for resphilosophica package +# +# This file is in public domain +# +# $Id: Makefile,v 1.2 2014-08-12 19:44:36 boris Exp $ +# + +PACKAGE=afparticle + +SAMPLES = afpsample.tex + +PDF = $(PACKAGE).pdf ${SAMPLES:%.tex=%.pdf} + +all: ${PDF} + + +%.pdf: %.dtx $(PACKAGE).cls + pdflatex $< + - bibtex $* + pdflatex $< + - makeindex -s gind.ist -o $*.ind $*.idx + - makeindex -s gglo.ist -o $*.gls $*.glo + pdflatex $< + while ( grep -q '^LaTeX Warning: Label(s) may have changed' $*.log) \ + do pdflatex $<; done + + +%.cls: %.ins %.dtx + pdflatex $< + +%.pdf: %.tex $(PACKAGE).cls + pdflatex $< + - bibtex $* + pdflatex $< + pdflatex $< + while ( grep -q '^LaTeX Warning: Label(s) may have changed' $*.log) \ + do pdflatex $<; done + + +.PRECIOUS: $(PACKAGE).cfg $(PACKAGE).cls + + +clean: + $(RM) *.log *.aux *.spl \ + *.cfg *.glo *.idx *.toc \ + *.ilg *.ind *.out *.lof \ + *.lot *.bbl *.blg *.gls \ + *.dvi *.ps *.hd *.rpi *.notes + +distclean: clean + $(RM) $(PDF) $(PACKAGE).cls + +# +# Archive for the distribution. Includes typeset documentation +# +archive: all clean + cd ..; \ + tar -czvf $(PACKAGE).tgz --exclude '*~' --exclude '*.tgz' --exclude CVS $(PACKAGE); \ + cd $(PACKAGE) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/README b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/README new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..24f2f4f9011 --- /dev/null +++ b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/README @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ + Typesetting Articles for Archives of Forensic Psychology + +This package provides a class for typesetting articles for the open +access journal Archives of Forensic Psychology, +http://www.archivesofforensicpsychology.com. diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/afparticle.pdf b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/afparticle.pdf new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..dc73459da6e Binary files /dev/null and b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/afparticle.pdf differ diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/afpsample.bib b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/afpsample.bib new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..27561a65b3c --- /dev/null +++ b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/afpsample.bib @@ -0,0 +1,1213 @@ +@Article{Haidt07, + author = {Jonathan Haidt}, + title = {The New Synthesis in Moral Psychology}, + journal = {Science}, + year = 2007, + volume = 316, + pages = {998--1002}, + annote = {People are selfish, yet morally motivated. Morality is +universal, yet culturally variable. Such apparent contradictions are +dissolving as research from many disciplines converges on a few shared +principles, including the importance of moral intuitions, the socially +functional (rather than truth-seeking) nature of moral thinking, and +the coevolution of moral minds with cultural practices and +institutions that create diverse moral communities. I propose a fourth +principle to guide future research: Morality is about more than harm +and fairness. More research is needed on the collective and religious +parts of the moral domain, such as loyalty, authority, and spiritual +purity.} +} + +@article{DeMarzo05, + type={Working Paper Series}, + title={{Relative Wealth Concerns and Technology Bubbles}}, + author={Demarzo, Peter M. and Kaniel, Ron and Kremer, Ilan }, + journal={SSRN eLibrary}, + year=2005, + publisher={SSRN}, + keywords={Bubble, technology, relative wealth, Joneses, herding, over-investment}, + location={http://ssrn.com/paper=668137}, + note={\url{http://ssrn.com/paper=668137}}, + language={English} +} + + +@article{Arrow63, + jstor_articletype = {primary_article}, + title = {Uncertainty and the Welfare Economics of Medical Care}, + author = {Arrow, Kenneth J.}, + journal = {The American Economic Review}, + jstor_issuetitle = {}, + volume = {53}, + number = {5}, + jstor_formatteddate = {Dec., 1963}, + pages = {941--973}, + url = {http://www.jstor.org/stable/1812044}, + ISSN = {00028282}, + abstract = {}, + language = {}, + year = {1963}, + publisher = {American Economic Association}, + copyright = {Copyright ¿ 1963 American Economic Association}, + } + +@Article{CluttonBrock09:Cooperation, + author = {Tim Clutton-Brock}, + title = {Cooperation Between Non-Kin in Animal Societies}, + journal = {Nature}, + year = 2009, + volume = 462, + pages = {51--57}, + annote = {Explanations of cooperation between non-kin in animal + societies often suggest that individuals exchange resources or + services and that cooperation is maintained by reciprocity. But do + cooperative interactions between unrelated individuals in non-human + animals really resemble exchanges or are they a consequence of + simpler mechanisms? Firm evidence of reciprocity in animal societies + is rare and many examples of cooperation between non-kin probably + represent cases of intra-specific mutualism or manipulation.} +} + + + +@article{Henrich10:MarketsReligionFairness, +author = {Henrich, Joseph and Ensminger, Jean and + McElreath, Richard and Barr, Abigail and + Barrett, Clark and Bolyanatz, Alexander and + Cardenas, Juan Camilo and Gurven, Michael and + Gwako, Edwins and Henrich, Natalie and + Lesorogol, Carolyn and Marlowe, Frank and + Tracer, David and Ziker, John}, +title = {Markets, Religion, Community Size, + and the Evolution of Fairness and Punishment}, +journal = {Science}, +volume = {327}, +number = {5972}, +pages = {1480--1484}, +doi = {10.1126/science.1182238}, +year = {2010}, +abstract = {Large-scale societies in which strangers regularly engage +in mutually beneficial transactions are puzzling. The evolutionary +mechanisms associated with kinship and reciprocity, which underpin +much of primate sociality, do not readily extend to large unrelated +groups. Theory suggests that the evolution of such societies may have +required norms and institutions that sustain fairness in ephemeral +exchanges. If that is true, then engagement in larger-scale +institutions, such as markets and world religions, should be +associated with greater fairness, and larger communities should punish +unfairness more. Using three behavioral experiments administered +across 15 diverse populations, we show that market integration +(measured as the percentage of purchased calories) positively covaries +with fairness while community size positively covaries with +punishment. Participation in a world religion is associated with +fairness, although not across all measures. These results suggest that +modern prosociality is not solely the product of an innate psychology, +but also reflects norms and institutions that have emerged over the +course of human history.}, +eprint = {http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/reprint/327/5972/1480.pdf} +} + +@article{Hoff10, +author = {Hoff, Karla}, +title = {Fairness in Modern Society}, +journal = {Science}, +volume = {327}, +number = {5972}, +pages = {1467--1468}, +doi = {10.1126/science.1188537}, +year = {2010}, +eprint = {http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/reprint/327/5972/1467.pdf} +} + + +@article{Woolley10012010, +author = {Woolley, Anita Williams and Chabris, Christopher F. + and Pentland, Alexander and Hashmi, Nada and Malone, Thomas W.}, +title = {Evidence for a Collective Intelligence Factor in the + Performance of Human Groups}, +journal = {Science}, +pages = {science.1193147}, +doi = {10.1126/science.1193147}, +year = {2010}, +abstract = {Psychologists have repeatedly shown that a single +statistical factor--often called "general intelligence"--emerges from +the correlations among people's performance on a wide variety of +cognitive tasks. But no one has systematically examined whether a +similar kind of "collective intelligence" exists for groups of +people. In two studies with 699 individuals, working in groups of two +to five, we find converging evidence of a general collective +intelligence factor that explains a group's performance on a wide +variety of tasks. This "c factor" is not strongly correlated with the +average or maximum individual intelligence of group members but is +correlated with the average social sensitivity of group members, the +equality in distribution of conversational turn-taking, and the +proportion of females in the group.}, +} + + +@article{Stapel08042011, + author = {Stapel, Diederik A. and Lindenberg, Siegwart}, + title = {Coping with Chaos: How Disordered Contexts Promote + Stereotyping and Discrimination}, + volume = 332, + number = 6026, + pages = {251--253}, + year = 2011, + doi = {10.1126/science.1201068}, + abstract ={Being the victim of discrimination can have serious + negative health- and quality-of-life–related + consequences. Yet, could being discriminated against depend on such + seemingly trivial matters as garbage on the streets? In this study, + we show, in two field experiments, that disordered contexts (such as + litter or a broken-up sidewalk and an abandoned bicycle) indeed + promote stereotyping and discrimination in real-world situations + and, in three lab experiments, that it is a heightened need for + structure that mediates these effects (number of subjects: between + 40 and 70 per experiment). These findings considerably advance our + knowledge of the impact of the physical environment on stereotyping + and discrimination and have clear policy implications: Diagnose + environmental disorder early and intervene immediately.}, + eprint = {http://www.sciencemag.org/content/332/6026/251.full.pdf}, + journal = {Science} +} + +@article{Freeman01:Libertarians, + title = {Illiberal Libertarians: + Why Libertarianism Is Not a Liberal View}, + author = {Freeman, Samuel}, + journal = {Philosophy & Public Affairs}, + volume = 30, + number = 2, + jstor_formatteddate = {Spring, 2001}, + pages = {105--151}, + url = {http://www.jstor.org/stable/3557960}, + ISSN = 00483915, + language = {English}, + year = 2001, + publisher = {Blackwell Publishing}, + copyright = {Copyright ¿ 2001 Princeton University Press}, +} + +@Article{Zintzaras10, + author = {Zintzaras, Elias and Santos, Mauro and + Szathmary, Eors}, + title = {Selfishness Versus Functional Cooperation in a Stochastic + Protocell Model}, + journal = {Journal of Theoretical Biolology}, + year = 2010, + volume = 267, + pages = {605--613}, + annote = {How to design an evolvable artificial system capable to + Increase in complexity? Although Darwin s theory of evolution by + natural selection obviously offers a firm foundation little hope of + success seems to be expected from the explanatory adequacy of + modern evolutionary theory which does a good job at explaining what + has already happened but remains practically helpless at predicting + what will occur However the study of the major transitions in + evolution clearly suggests that Increases in complexity have + occurred on those occasions when the conflicting interests between + competing individuals were partly subjugated This immediately + raises the issue about levels of selection in evolutionary biology + and the idea that multi-level selection scenarios are required for + complexity to emerge After analyzing the dynamical behaviour of + competing replicators within compartments we show here that a + proliferation of differentiated catalysts and/or improvement of + catalytic efficiency of ribozymes can potentially evolve in + properly designed artificial cells where the strong internal + competition between the different species of replicators is + somewhat prevented (i e by choosing them with equal probability) + Experimental evolution in these systems will likely stand as + beautiful examples of artificial adaptive systems and will provide + new insights to understand possible evolutionary paths to the + evolution of metabolic complexity (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd All rights + reserved} +} + +@Article{Boza10, + author = {Boza, Gergely and Szamado, Szabolcs}, + title = {Beneficial Laggards: Multilevel Selection, + Cooperative Polymorphism and + Division of Labour in {T}hreshold {P}ublic {G}ood {G}ames}, + journal = {BMC Evol. Biol.}, + year = 2010, + volume = 10, + pages = {Article~336}, + annote = {Background: The origin and stability of cooperation is + a hot topic in social and behavioural sciences. A complicated + conundrum exists as defectors have an advantage over cooperators, + whenever cooperation is costly so consequently, not cooperating + pays off. In addition, the discovery that humans and some animal + populations, such as lions, are polymorphic, where cooperators and + defectors stably live together - while defectors are not being + punished-, is even more puzzling. Here we offer a novel explanation + based on a Threshold Public Good Game (PGG) that includes the + interaction of individual and group level selection, where + individuals can contribute to multiple collective actions, in our + model group hunting and group defense. Results: Our results show + that there are polymorphic equilibria in Threshold PGGs; that + multi-level selection does not select for the most cooperators per + group but selects those close to the optimum number of cooperators + (in terms of the Threshold PGG). In particular for medium cost + values division of labour evolves within the group with regard to + the two types of cooperative actions (hunting + vs. defense). Moreover we show evidence that spatial population + structure promotes cooperation in multiple PGGs. We also + demonstrate that these results apply for a wide range of non-linear + benefit function types. Conclusions: We demonstrate that + cooperation can be stable in Threshold PGG, even when the + proportion of so called free riders is high in the population. A + fundamentally new mechanism is proposed how laggards, individuals + that have a high tendency to defect during one specific group + action can actually contribute to the fitness of the group, by + playing part in an optimal resource allocation in Threshold Public + Good Games. In general, our results show that acknowledging a + multilevel selection process will open up novel explanations for + collective actions.} +} + +@Article{Rainey10, + author = {Rainey, Paul B. and Kerr, Benjamin}, + title = {Cheats as First Propagules: A New Hypothesis for the + Evolution of Individuality During the Transition from + Single Cells to Multicellularity}, + journal = {Bioessays}, + year = 2010, + volume = 32, + pages = {872--880}, + annote = {The emergence of individuality during the evolutionary + transition from single cells to multicellularity poses a range of + problems. A key issue is how variation in lower-level individuals + generates a corporate (collective) entity with Darwinian + characteristics. Of central importance to this process is the + evolution of a means of collective reproduction, however, the + evolution of a means of collective reproduction is not a trivial + issue, requiring careful consideration of mechanistic + details. Calling upon observations from experiments, we draw + attention to proto-life cycles that emerge via unconventional + routes and that transition, in single steps, individuality to + higher levels. One such life cycle arises from conflicts among + levels of selection and invokes cheats as a primitive germ line: it + lays the foundation for collective reproduction, the basis of a + self-policing system, the selective environment for the emergence + of development, and hints at a plausible origin for a soma/germ + line distinction.} } + + +@Article{Pigliucci10, + author = {Pigliucci, Massimo}, + title = {Okasha's Evolution and the Levels of Selection: + Toward a Broader + Conception of Theoretical Biology}, + journal = {Biol. Philos.}, + year = 2010, + volume = 25, + pages = {405--415}, + annote = {The debate about the levels of selection has been one + of the most controversial both in evolutionary biology and in + philosophy of science. Okasha's book makes the sort of + contribution that simply will not be able to be ignored by anyone + interested in this field for many years to come. However, my + interest here is in highlighting some examples of how Okasha goes + about discussing his material to suggest that his book is part of + an increasingly interesting trend that sees scientists and + philosophers coming together to build a broadened concept of + "theory" through a combination of standard mathematical treatments + and conceptual analyses. Given the often contentious history of the + relationship between philosophy and science, such trend cannot but + be welcome.} +} + +@Article{Okasha09, + author = {Okasha, Samir}, + title = {Individuals, Groups, Fitness and Utility: + Multi-Level Selection Meets Social Choice Theory}, + journal = {Biol. Philos.}, + year = 2009, + volume = 24, + pages = {561--584}, + annote = {In models of multi-level selection, the property of + Darwinian fitness is attributed to entities at more than one level + of the biological hierarchy, e. g. individuals and groups. However, + the relation between individual and group fitness is a + controversial matter. Theorists disagree about whether group + fitness should always, or ever, be defined as total (or average) + individual fitness. This paper tries to shed light on the issue by + drawing on work in social choice theory, and pursuing an analogy + between fitness and utility. Social choice theorists have long been + interested in the relation between individual and social utility, + and have identified conditions under which social utility equals + total (or average) individual utility. These ideas are used to shed + light on the biological problem.} +} + +@Article{Pigliucci09, + author = {Pigliucci, Massimo}, + title = {{S}amir {O}kasha: {E}volution and the Levels of Selection}, + journal = {Biol. Philos.}, + year = 2009, + volume = 24, + pages = {551--560}, + annote = {The debate about the levels of selection has been one + of the most controversial both in evolutionary biology and in + philosophy of science. Okasha's book makes the sort of + contribution that simply will not be able to be ignored by anyone + interested in this field for many years to come. However, my + interest here is in highlighting some examples of how Okasha goes + about discussing his material to suggest that his book is part of + an increasingly interesting trend that sees scientists and + philosophers coming together to build a broadened concept of + "theory" through a combination of standard mathematical treatments + and conceptual analyses. Given the often contentious history of the + relationship between philosophy and science, such trend cannot but + be welcome.} +} + +@Article{Egas08, + author = {Egas, Martijn and Riedl, Arno}, + title = {Proc. R. Soc. B.}, + journal = {The Economics of Altruistic Punishment and the Maintenance + of Cooperation}, + year = 2008, + volume = 275, + pages = {871--878}, + annote = {Explaining the evolution and maintenance of cooperation + among unrelated individuals is one of the fundamental problems in + biology and the social sciences. Recent findings suggest that + altruistic punishment is an important mechanism maintaining + cooperation among humans. We experimentally explore the boundaries + of altruistic punishment to maintain cooperation by varying both + the cost and the impact of punishment, using an exceptionally + extensive subject pool. Our results show that cooperation is only + maintained if conditions for altruistic punishment are relatively + favourable: low cost for the punisher and high impact on the + punished. Our results indicate that punishment is strongly governed + by its cost-to-impact ratio and that its effect on cooperation can + be pinned down to one single variable: the threshold level of + free-riding that goes unpunished. Additionally, actual pay-offs are + the lowest when altruistic punishment maintains cooperation, + because the pay-off destroyed through punishment exceeds the gains + from increased cooperation. Our results are consistent with the + interpretation that punishment decisions come from an amalgam of + emotional response and cognitive cost-impact analysis and suggest + that altruistic punishment alone can hardly maintain cooperation + under multi-level natural selection. Uncovering the workings of + altruistic punishment as has been done here is important because it + helps predicting under which conditions altruistic punishment is + expected to maintain cooperation.} +} + +@Article{Helanterae06, + author = {Helanter{\"a}, H.}, + title = {The Unity That Does Not Exist---A Review of + {A.} {B}urt \& {R.} {T}rivers 2006: {G}enes in {C}onflict}, + journal = {J. Evol. Bol.}, + year = 2006, + volume = 19, + pages = {2067--2070}, + annote = {Organisms harbour several genetic elements with the + potential to act selfishly, and thus undermine the fitness of the + organism as a whole. In their book 'Genes in conflict', Austin Burt + and Robert Trivers thoroughly review evolution and molecular + biology of such selfish genetics elements, and set them in a kin + selection framework. In this review I set their views in a larger + multi-level selection framework, and consider potential problems in + the study of selfish genetics elements.} +} + +@Article{Okasha05, + author = {Okasha, Samir}, + title = {Altruism, Group Selection and Correlated Interaction}, + journal = {Brit. J. Phil. Sci.}, + year = 2005, + volume = 56, + pages = {703--725}, + annote = {Group selection is one acknowledged mechanism for the + evolution of altruism. It is well known that for altruism to spread + by natural selection, interactions must be correlated; that is, + altruists must tend to associate with one another. But does group + selection itself require correlated interactions? Two possible + arguments for answering this question affirmatively are + explored. The first is a bad argument, for it rests on a + product/process confusion. The second is a more subtle argument, + whose validity (or otherwise) turns on issues concerning the + meaning of multi-level selection and how it should be modelled. A + cautious defence of the second argument is offered. + 1 Introduction + 2 Multi-level selection and the evolution of altruism + 3 Price's equation and multi-level selection + 4 Contextual analysis and multi-level selection + 5 The neighbour approach + 6 Recapitulation and conclusion.} +} + +@Article{Okasha04, + author = {Okasha, Samir}, + title = {Multi-Level Selection, Covariance and Contextual Analysis}, + journal = {Brit. J. Phil. Sci.}, + year = 2004, + volume = 55, + pages = {481--504}, + annote = {Two alternative statistical approaches to modelling + multi-level selection in nature, both found in the contemporary + biological literature, are contrasted. The simple covariance + approach partitions the total selection differential on a + phenotypic character into within-group and between-group + components, and identifies the change due to group selection with + the latter. The contextual approach partitions the total selection + differential into different components, using multivariate + regression analysis. The two approaches have different implications + for the question of what constitutes group selection and what does + not. I argue that the contextual approach is theoretically + preferable. This has important implications for a number of issues + in the philosophical debate about the levels of selection.} } + + +@Article{Bowles04, + author = {Bowles, Samuel and Gintis, Herbert}, + title = {The Evolution of Strong Reciprocity: Cooperation + in Heterogeneous Populations}, + journal = {Theor. Population Biol.}, + year = 2004, + volume = 65, + pages = {17--28}, + annote = {How do human groups maintain a high level of + cooperation despite a low level of genetic relatedness among group + members? We suggest that many humans have a predisposition to + punish those who violate group-beneficial norms, even when this + imposes a fitness cost on the punisher. Such altruistic punishment + is widely observed to sustain high levels of cooperation in + behavioral experiments and in natural settings. We offer a model + of cooperation and punishment that we call strong reciprocity: + where members of a group benefit from mutual adherence to a social + norm, strong reciprocators obey the norm and punish its violators, + even though as a result they receive lower payoffs than other group + members, such as selfish agents who violate the norm and do not + punish, and pure cooperators who adhere to the norm but free-ride + by never punishing. Our agent-based simulations show that, under + assumptions approximating likely human environments over the + 100,000 years prior to the domestication of animals and plants, the + proliferation of strong reciprocators when initially rare is highly + likely, and that substantial frequencies of all three behavioral + types can be sustained in a population. As a result, high levels of + cooperation are sustained. Our results do not require that group + members be related or that group extinctions occur. (C) 2003 + Published by Elsevier Inc.} } + + +@Article{Gintis03, + author = {Gintis, Herbert}, + title = {The Hitchhiker's Guide to Altruism: Gene-Culture + Coevolution, and the Internalization of Norms}, + journal = {J. Theor. Biol.}, + year = 2003, + volume = 220, + pages = {407--418}, + annote = {An internal norm is a pattern of behavior enforced in + part by internal sanctions, such as shame, guilt and loss of + self-esteem, as opposed to purely external sanctions, such as + material rewards and punishment. The ability to internalize norms + is widespread among humans, although in some so-called + "sociopaths", this capacity is diminished or lacking. Suppose + there is one genetic locus that controls the capacity to + internalize norms. This model shows that if an internal norm is + fitness enhancing, then for plausible patterns of socialization, + the allele for internalization of norms is evolutionarily + stable. This framework can be used to model Herbert Simon's (1990) + explanation of altruism, showing that altruistic norms can + "hitchhike" on the general tendency of internal norms to be + personally fitness-enhancing. A multi-level selection, gene-culture + coevolution argument then explains why individually + fitness-reducing internal norms are likely to be prosocial as + opposed to socially harmful. (C) 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All + rights reserved.} } + +@Article{Kerr02, + author = {Kerr, Benjamin and Godfrey-Smith, Peter}, + title = {Individualist and Multi-Level Perspectives on Selection + in Structured Populations}, + journal = {Biol. Philos.}, + year = 2002, + volume = 17, + pages = {477--517}, + annote = {Recent years have seen a renewed debate over the + importance of group selection, especially as it relates to the + evolution of altruism. One feature of this debate has been + disagreement over which kinds of processes should be described in + terms of selection at multiple levels, within and between + groups. Adapting some earlier discussions, we present a + mathematical framework that can be used to explore the exact + relationships between evolutionary models that do, and those that + do not, explicitly recognize biological groups as fitness-bearing + entities. We show a fundamental set of mathematical equivalences + between these two kinds of models, one of which applies a form of + multi-level selection theory and the other being a form of + "individualism." However, we also argue that each type of model can + have heuristic advantages over the other. Indeed, it can be + positively useful to engage in a kind of back-and-forth switching + between two different perspectives on the evolutionary role of + groups. So the position we defend is a "gestalt-switching + pluralism".} } + + +@Article{Kerr02a, + author = {Kerr, Benjamin and Godfrey-Smith, Peter}, + title = {On {P}rice's Equation and Average Fitness}, + journal = {Biol. Philos.}, + year = 2002, + volume = 17, + pages = {551--565}, + annote = {A number of recent discussions have argued that George + Price's equation for representing evolutionary change is a powerful + and illuminating tool, especially in the context of debates about + multiple levels of selection. Our paper dissects Price's equation + in detail, and compares it to another statistical tool: the + calculation and comparison of average fitnesses. The relations + between Price's equation and equations for evolutionary change + using average fitness are closer than is sometimes supposed. The + two approaches achieve a similar kind of statistical summary of one + generation of change, and they achieve this via a similar loss of + information about the underlying fitness structure.} +} + +@Article{Nachtomy02, + author = {Nachtomy, Ohad and Shavit, Ayelet and Smith, Justin}, + title = {Leibnizian Organisms, Nested Individuals, and + Units of Selection}, + journal = {Theory Biosci.}, + year = 2002, + volume = 121, + pages = {205--230}, + annote = {Leibniz developed a new notion of individuality, + according to which individuals are nested one within another, + thereby abandoning the Aristotelian formula at the heart of + substantialist metaphysics, 'one body, one substance'. On this + model, the level of individuality is determined by the degree of + activity, and partly defined by its relations with other + individuals. In this article, we show the importance of this new + notion of individuality for some persisting questions in + theoretical biology. Many evolutionary theorists presuppose a model + of individuality that will eventually reduce to spatiotemporal + mechanisms, and some still look for an exclusive level or function + to determine a unit of selection. In recent years, a number of + alternatives to these exclusive approaches have emereged, and no + consensus can be foreseen. It is for this reason that we propose + the model of nested individuals. This model supports pluralistic + multi-level selection and rejects an exclusive level or function + for a unit of selection. Since activity is essential to the unity + of an individual, this model focuses on integrating processes of + interaction and replication instead of choosing between them. In + addition, the model of nested individuals may also be seen as a + distinct perspective among the various alternative models for the + unit of selection. This model stresses activity and pluralism: it + accepts simultaneuous co-existence of individuals at different + levels, nested one within the other. Our aim in this article is to + show now a chapter of the history of metaphysics may be fruitfully + brought to bear on the current debate over the unit of selection in + evolutionary biology.} } + +@Article{Canals98, + author = {Canals, Jos{\'e} and Vega-Redondo, Fernando}, + title = {Multi-Level Evolution in Population Games}, + journal = {Int. J. Game Theory}, + year = 1998, + volume = 27, + pages = {21--35}, + annote = {In this paper, we analyze a generalization of the + evolutionary model of Kandori, Mailath, & Rob (1993) where the + population is partitioned into groups and evolution takes place "in + parallel" at the following two levels: (i) within groups, at the + lower level; among groups, at the higher one. Unlike in their + context, efficiency considerations always overcome those of + risk-dominance in the process of selecting the long-run + equilibrium. This provides an explicitly dynamic basis for a + conclusion reminiscent of those put forward in the biological + literature by the so-called theories group selection. From a + normative viewpoint, it suggests the potential importance of + "decentralization", here understood as local and independent + interaction.} } + +@Article{Simon10, + author = {Simon, Burton}, + title = {A Dynamical Model of Two-Level Selection}, + journal = {Evol. Ecol. Res.}, + year = 2010, + volume = 12, + pages = {555--588}, + annote = {Question: How do continuous-time evolutionary + trajectories of two-level + selection behave? + Approach: Construct and solve a dynamical model of two-level selection + capable of predicting evolutionary trajectories and equilibrium + configurations. + Mathematical methods: Evolutionary birth-death processes, simulation, + large population asymptotics, numerical solutions of hyperbolic PDEs. + Key assumptions: Environment composed of distinct groups of individuals. + Individuals' birth and death rates are differentiable functions of the + state of the environment. Groups' fissioning and extinction rates are + integrable functions of the state of the environment. + Main results: A continuous-time, discrete-state, stochastic model of + two-level selection that can be simulated exactly. A continuous-time, + continuous-state, deterministic (PDE) model of two-level selection that + can be solved numerically. A mathematical connection between the + stochastic and deterministic models. Equilibrium configurations of the + environment in models of the evolution of cooperation by two-level + selection often consist of complicated mixtures of groups of varying + sizes, ages, and levels of cooperation.} +} + +@Article{Goodnight11, + author = {Goodnight, Charles J.}, + title = {Evolution in Metacommunities}, + journal = {Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B}, + year = 2011, + volume = 366, + pages = {1401--1409}, + annote = {A metacommunity can be defined as a set of communities + that are linked by migration, and extinction and recolonization. In + metacommunities, evolution can occur not only by processes that + occur within communities such as drift and individual selection, + but also by among-community processes, such as divergent selection + owing to random differences among communities in species + composition, and group and community-level selection. The effect of + these among-community-level processes depends on the pattern of + migration among communities. Migrating units may be individuals + (migrant pool model), groups of individuals (single-species + propagule pool model) or multi-species associations (multi-species + propagule pool model). The most interesting case is the + multi-species propagule pool model. Although this pattern of + migration may a priori seem rare, it becomes more plausible in + small well-defined 'communities' such as symbiotic associations + between two or a few species. Theoretical models and experimental + studies show that community selection is potentially an effective + evolutionary force. Such evolution can occur either through genetic + changes within species or through changes in the species + composition of the communities. Although laboratory studies show + that community selection can be important, little is known about + how important it is in natural populations.} } + +@Article{Nunney85a, + author = {Len Nunney}, + title = {Group Selection, Altruism, and Structured-Deme Models}, + journal = {American Naturalist}, + year = 1985, + volume = 126, + pages = {212--230} +} + + +@Article{Nunney85b, + author = {Len Nunney}, + title = {Female-Biased Sex Ratios: Individual or Group Selection?}, + journal = {Evolution}, + year = 1985, + volume = 39, + pages = {349--361} +} + +@Article{Lion11, + author = {S{\'e}bastien Lion and Vincent A. A. Jansen and Troy Day}, + title = {Evolution in Structured Populations: + Beyond the Kin Versus Group Debate}, + journal = {Trends Ecol. Evol.}, + year = 2011, + volume = 26, + pages = {193--201}, + annote = {Much of the literature on social evolution is pervaded +by the old debate about the relative merits of kin and group +selection. In this debate, the biological interpretation of processes +occurring in real populations is often conflated with the mathematical +methodology used to describe these processes. Here, we highlight the +distinction between the two by placing this discussion within the +broader context of evolution in structured populations. In this review +we show that the current debate overlooks important aspects of the +interplay between genetic and demographic structuring, and argue that +a continued focus on the relative merits of kin versus group selection +distracts attention from moving the field forward.} } + +@Article{Leigh09, + author = {Leigh, E. G., Jr.}, + title = {The Group Selection Controversy}, + journal = {J. Evol. Biol.}, + year = 2009, + volume = 23, + pages = {6--19}, + annote = {Many thought Darwinian natural selection could not +explain altruism. This error led Wynne-Edwards to explain sustainable +exploitation in animals by selection against overexploiting +groups. Williams riposted that selection among groups rarely overrides +within-group selection. Hamilton showed that altruism can evolve +through kin selection. How strongly does group selection influence +evolution? Following Price, Hamilton showed how levels of selection +interact: group selection prevails if Hamilton's rule applies. Several +showed that group selection drove some major evolutionary +transitions. Following Hamilton's lead, Queller extended Hamilton's +rule, replacing genealogical relatedness by the regression on an +actor's genotypic altruism of interacting neighbours' phenotypic +altruism. Price's theorem shows the generality of Hamilton's rule. All +instances of group selection can be viewed as increasing inclusive +fitness of autosomal genomes. Nonetheless, to grasp fully how +cooperation and altruism evolve, most biologists need more concrete +concepts like kin selection, group selection and selection among +individuals for their common good. } } + +@Article{Platt09, + author = {Thomas G. Platt and James D. Bever}, + title = {Kin Competition and the Evolution + of Cooperation}, + journal = {Trends Ecol. Evol.}, + year = 2009, + volume = 24, + pages = {370--377}, + annote = {Kin and multilevel selection theories predict that +genetic structure is required for the evolution of +cooperation. However, local competition among relatives can limit +cooperative benefits, antagonizing the evolution of cooperation. We +show that several ecological factors determine the extent to which kin +competition constrains cooperative benefits. In addition, we argue +that cooperative acts that expand local carrying capacity are less +constrained by kin competition than other cooperative traits, and are +therefore more likely to evolve. These arguments are particularly +relevant to microbial cooperation, which often involves the production +of public goods that promote population expansion. The challenge now +is to understand how an organism's ecology influences how much +cooperative groups contribute to future generations and thereby the +evolution of cooperation.} } + +@Article{Rankin07, + author = {Daniel J. Rankin and Katja Bargum and Hanna Kokko}, + title = {The Tragedy of the Commons in + Evolutionary Biology}, + journal = {Trends Ecol. Evol.}, + year = 2007, + volume = 22, + pages = {643--651}, + annote = {Garrett Hardin's tragedy of the commons is an analogy +that shows how individuals driven by self-interest can end up +destroying the resource upon which they all depend. The proposed +solutions for humans rely on highly advanced skills such as +negotiation, which raises the question of how non-human organisms +manage to resolve similar tragedies. In recent years, this question +has promoted evolutionary biologists to apply the tragedy of the +commons to a wide range of biological systems. Here, we provide tools +to categorize different types of tragedy and review different +mechanisms, including kinship, policing and diminishing returns that +can resolve conflicts that could otherwise end in tragedy. A central +open question, however, is how often biological systems are able to +resolve these scenarios rather than drive themselves extinct through +individual-level selection favouring self-interested behaviours.} } + +@Article{Taylor07:Dilemma, + author = {Christine Taylor and Martin A. Nowak}, + title = {Transforming the Dilemma}, + journal = {Evolution}, + year = 2007, + volume = 61, + pages = {2281--2292}, + annote = {How does natural selection lead to cooperation between +competing individuals ? The Prisoner's Dilemma captures the essence of +this problem. Two players can either cooperate or defect. The payoff +for mutual cooperation, R, is greater than the payoff for mutual +defection, P. But a defector versus a cooperator receives the highest +payoff, T, where as the cooperator obtains the lowest payoff, +S. Hence, the Prisoner's Dilemma is defined by the payoff ranking T > +R > P > S. In a well-mixed population, defectors always have a higher +expected payoff than cooperators, and therefore natural selection +favors defectors. The evolution of cooperation requires specific +mechanisms. Here we discuss five mechanisms for the evolution of +cooperation: direct reciprocity, indirect reciprocity, kin selection, +group selection, and network reciprocity (or graph selection). Each +mechanism leads to a transformation of the Prisoner's Dilemma payoff +matrix. From the transformed matrices, we derive the fundamental +conditions for the evolution of cooperation. The transformed matrices +can be used in standard frameworks of evolutionary dynamics such as +the replicator equation or stochastic processes of game dynamics in +finite populations.} } + +@Article{West07, + author = {Stuart A. West and Stephen P. Diggle and Angus Buckling + and Andy Gardner and Ashleigh S. Griffin}, + title = {The Social Lives of Microbes}, + journal = {Ann. Rev. Evol. Ecol. Systematics}, + year = 2007, + volume = 38, + pages = {53--77}, + annote = {Our understanding of the social lives of microbes has been + revolutionized over the past 20 years. It used to be assumed that + bacteria and other microorganisms lived relatively independent + unicellular lives, without the cooperative behaviors that have + provoked so much interest in mammals, birds, and insects. However, a + rapidly expanding body of research has completely overturned this + idea, showing that microbes indulge in a variety of social behaviors + involving complex systems of cooperation, communication, and + synchronization. Work in this area has already provided some elegant + experimental tests of social evolutionary theory, demonstrating the + importance of factors such as relatedness, kin discrimination, + competition between relatives, and enforcement of cooperation. Our + aim here is to review these social behaviors, emphasizing the unique + opportunities they offer for testing existing evolutionary theory as + well as highlighting the novel theoretical problems that they pose.} +} + +@Article{Lehmann06, + author = {L. Lehmann and L. Keller}, + title = {The Evolution of Cooperation and Altruism---A + General Framework and a Classification of Models}, + journal = {J. Evol. Biol.}, + year = 2006, + volume = 19, + pages = {1365--1376}, + annote = {One of the enduring puzzles in biology and the social +sciences is the origin and persistence of intraspecific cooperation +and altruism in humans and other species. Hundreds of theoretical +models have been proposed and there is much confusion about the +relationship between these models. To clarify the situation, we +developed a synthetic conceptual framework that delineates the +conditions necessary for the evolution of altruism and cooperation. We +show that at least one of the four following conditions needs to be +fulfilled: direct benefits to the focal individual performing a +cooperative act; direct or indirect information allowing a better than +random guess about whether a given individual will behave +cooperatively in repeated reciprocal interactions; preferential +interactions between related individuals; and genetic correlation +between genes coding for altruism and phenotypic traits that can be +identified. When one or more of these conditions are met, altruism or +cooperation can evolve if the cost-to-benefit ratio of altruistic and +cooperative acts is greater than a threshold value. The +cost-to-benefit ratio can be altered by coercion, punishment and +policing which therefore act as mechanisms facilitating the evolution +of altruism and cooperation. All the models proposed so far are +explicitly or implicitly built on these general principles, allowing +us to classify them into four general categories.} } + +@Article{Wilson83, + author = {David Sloan Wilson}, + title = {The Group Selection Controversy: History and + Current Status}, + journal = {Ann. Rev. Ecol. Systematics}, + year = 1983, + volume = 14, + pages = {159--187} +} + +@Article{West07a, + author = {S. A. West and A. S. Griffin and A. Gardner}, + title = {Social Semantics: Altruism, Cooperation, Mutualism, + Strong Reciprocity and Group Selection}, + journal = {J. Evol. Biol.}, + year = 2007, + volume = 20, + pages = {415--432}, + annote = {From an evolutionary perspective, social behaviours are +those which have fitness consequences for both the individual that +performs the behaviour, and another individual. Over the last 43 +years, a huge theoretical and empirical literature has developed on +this topic. However, progress is often hindered by poor communication +between scientists, with different people using the same term to mean +different things, or different terms to mean the same thing. This can +obscure what is biologically important, and what is not. The potential +for such semantic confusion is greatest with interdisciplinary +research. Our aim here is to address issues of semantic confusion that +have arisen with research on the problem of cooperation. In +particular, we: (i) discuss confusion over the terms kin selection, +mutualism, mutual benefit, cooperation, altruism, reciprocal altruism, +weak altruism, altruistic punishment, strong reciprocity, group +selection and direct fitness; (ii) emphasize the need to distinguish +between proximate (mechanism) and ultimate (survival value) +explanations of behaviours. We draw examples from all areas, but +especially recent work on humans and microbes. } } + +@Article{Wilson08, + author = {D. S. Wilson}, + title = {Social Semantics: Toward a Genuine Pluralism in the + Study of Social Behaviour}, + journal = {J. Evol. Biol.}, + year = 2008, + volume = 21, + pages = {368--373}, + annote = {Pluralism is the coexistence of equivalent theoretical +frameworks, either because they are historically entrenched or because +they achieve separate insights by viewing the same process in +different ways. A recent article by West et al. [Journal of +Evolutionary Biology (2007) vol. 20, 415-432] attempts to classify the +many equivalent frameworks that have been developed to study the +evolution of social behaviour. This article addresses shortcomings in +the West et al.'s article, especially with respect to multilevel +selection, in a common effort to maximize the benefits of pluralism +while minimizing the semantic costs.} } + +@Article{West08, + author = {S. A. West and A. S. Griffin and A. Gardner}, + title = {Social Semantics: How Useful Has Group Selection Been?}, + journal = {J. Evol. Biol.}, + year = 2008, + volume = 21, + pages = {374--385}, + annote = {In our social semantics review ( J. Evol. Biol., 2007, +415-432), we discussed some of the misconceptions and sources of +confusion associated with group selection. Wilson (2007, this issue) +claims that we made three errors regarding group selection. Here, we +aim to expand upon the relevant points from our review in order to +refute this claim. The last 45 years of research provide clear +evidence of the relative use of the kin and group selection +approaches. Kin selection methodologies are more tractable, allowing +the construction of models that can be applied more easily to specific +biological examples, including those chosen by Wilson to illustrate +the utility of the group selection approach. In contrast, the group +selection approach is not only less useful, but also appears to +frequently have negative consequences by fostering confusion that +leads to wasted effort. More generally, kin selection theory allows +the construction of a unified conceptual overview that can be applied +across all taxa, whereas there is no formal theory of group +selection.} } + +@Article{Hamilton64a, + author = {Hamilton, W. D.}, + title = {The Genetical Evolution of Social Behavior. {I}}, + journal = {J. Theor. Biol.}, + year = 1964, + volume = 7, + pages = {1--16} +} + +@Article{Hamilton64b, + author = {Hamilton, W. D.}, + title = {The Genetical Evolution of Social Behavior. {II}}, + journal = {J. Theor. Biol.}, + year = 1964, + volume = 7, + pages = {17--52} +} + + +@Article{Lion09, + author = {S. Lion and S. Gandon}, + title = {Habitat Saturation and the Spatial Evolutionary Ecology + of Altruism}, + journal = {J. Evol. Biol.}, + year = 2009, + volume = 22, + pages = {1487--1502}, + annote = {Under which ecological conditions should individuals +help their neighbours? We investigate the effect of habitat saturation +on the evolution of helping behaviours in a spatially structured +population. We combine the formalisms of population genetics and +spatial moment equations to tease out the effects of various +physiological (direct benefits and costs of helping) and ecological +parameters (such as the density of empty sites) on the selection +gradient on helping. Our analysis highlights the crucial importance of +demography for the evolution of helping behaviours. It shows that +habitat saturation can have contrasting effects, depending on the form +of competition (direct vs. indirect competition) and on the +conditionality of helping. In our attempt to bridge the gap between +spatial ecology and population genetics, we derive an expression for +relatedness that takes into account both habitat saturation and the +spatial structure of genetic variation. This analysis helps clarify +discrepancies in the results obtained by previous theoretical +studies. It also provides a theoretical framework taking into account +the interplay between demography and kin selection, in which new +biological questions can be explored.} } + +@Article{Wilson77, + author = {David Sloan Wilson}, + title = {Structured Demes and the Evolution of + Group-Advantageous Traits}, + journal = {American Naturalist}, + year = 1977, + volume = 111, + pages = {157--185}, + annote = {1. Most organisms interact with a set of neighbors +smaller than the deme (its trait group). Demes therefore are not only +a population of individuals but also a population of groups +(structured demes). 2. Trait groups vary in their composition. The +minimum variance to be expected is that arising from a binomial +distribution. Most populations have a higher variance than this due to +(a) differential interactions with the environment and (b) the effects +of reproduction inside the trait groups. 3. As a consequence of this +variation, an individual on the average experiences its own "type" in +a greater frequency than actually exists in the deme. Its behaviors +are therefore directed differentially toward fellow types, and this is +the fundamental requirement for the evolution of altruism. 4. Models +are presented for warning cries and other donor-recipient relations, +resource notification, the evolution of prudence in exploitation and +interference competition, and the effect of differential trait-group +extinction. In all cases evolution in structured demes differs from +traditional individual-selection models. Individual selection +corresponds to the case where there is zero variance among trait +groups, that is, complete homogeneity. 5. The "threshold" variance +permitting the evolution of altruism (negative fitness change to the +donor) is that arising from a binomial distribution. As this is the +minimum to be expected in nature, this theory predicts that at least +weakly altruistic behavior should be a common occurrence (but see +[9]). 6. If a population is overexploiting its resource, a decrease in +feeding rate through interference may be selected for given any +trait-group variation. 7. When trait groups are composed entirely of +siblings (i.e., kin groups), the model is mathematically equivalent to +kin selection. 8. As well as increasing population fitness, social +systems may also evolve an "immunity" against group-detrimental +types. 9. If a given group-advantageous effect can be accomplished +through both altruistic and selfish mechanisms, the selfish mechanism +will be selected. A paucity of altruistic behaviors may signify that +it is usually possible to create the same result selfishly--not that +altruism "cannot" be selected for} } + +@Article{Fletcher09, + author = {Jeffrey A. Fletcher and Michael Doebeli}, + title = {A Simple and General Explanation for the + Evolution of Altruism}, + journal = {Proc. Roy. Soc. B}, + year = 2009, + volume = 276, + pages = {13--19}, + annote = {We present a simple framework that highlights the most +fundamental requirement for the evolution of altruism: assortment +between individuals carrying the cooperative genotype and the helping +behaviours of others with which these individuals interact. We +partition the fitness effects on individuals into those due to self +and those due to the \u2018interaction environment\u2019, and show +that it is the latter that is most fundamental to understanding the +evolution of altruism. We illustrate that while kinship or genetic +similarity among those interacting may generate a favourable structure +of interaction environments, it is not a fundamental requirement for +the evolution of altruism, and even suicidal aid can theoretically +evolve without help ever being exchanged among genetically similar +individuals. Using our simple framework, we also clarify a common +confusion made in the literature between alternative fitness +accounting methods (which may equally apply to the same biological +circumstances) and unique causal mechanisms for creating the +assortment necessary for altruism to be favoured by natural +selection.} } + +@Article{Lion09a, + author = {S{\'e}bastien Lion}, + title = {Relatedness in Spatially Structured Populations + with Empty Sites: An Approach Based on Spatial Moment + Equations}, + journal = {J. Theor. Biol.}, + year = 2009, + volume = 260, + pages = {121--131}, + annote = {Taking into account the interplay between spatial +ecological dynamics and selection is a major challenge in evolutionary +ecology. Although inclusive fitness theory has proven to be a very +useful tool to unravel the interactions between spatial genetic +structuring and selection, applications of the theory usually rely on +simplifying demographic assumptions. In this paper, I attempt to +bridge the gap between spatial demographic models and kin selection +models by providing a method to compute approximations for relatedness +coefficients in a spatial model with empty sites. Using spatial moment +equations, I provide an approximation of nearest-neighbour relatedness +on random regular networks, and show that this approximation performs +much better than the ordinary pair approximation. I discuss the +connection between the relatedness coefficients I define and those +used in population genetics, and sketch some potential extensions of +the theory.} } + +@article{Hirose22072011, +author = {Hirose, Shigenori and Benabentos, Rocio and Ho, Hsing-I and Kuspa, Adam and Shaulsky, Gad}, +title = {Self-Recognition in Social Amoebae Is Mediated by Allelic Pairs of Tiger Genes}, +volume = 333, +number = 6041, +pages = {467-470}, +year = 2011, +journal = {Science}, +doi = {10.1126/science.1203903}, +abstract ={Free-living cells of the social amoebae Dictyostelium +discoideum can aggregate and develop into multicellular fruiting +bodies in which many die altruistically as they become stalk cells +that support the surviving spores. Dictyostelium cells exhibit kin +discrimination—a potential defense against cheaters, which +sporulate without contributing to the stalk. Kin discrimination +depends on strain relatedness, and the polymorphic genes tgrB1 and +tgrC1 are potential components of that mechanism. Here, we demonstrate +a direct role for these genes in kin discrimination. We show that a +matching pair of tgrB1 and tgrC1 alleles is necessary and sufficient +for attractive self-recognition, which is mediated by differential +cell-cell adhesion. We propose that TgrB1 and TgrC1 proteins mediate +this adhesion through direct binding. This system is a genetically +tractable ancient model of eukaryotic self-recognition.}, +} + +@Article{Leadbeater11, + author = {Ellouise Leadbeater b*mand Jonathan M. Carruthers + and Jonathan P. Green and Neil S. Rosser + and Jeremy Field}, + title = {Nest Inheritance Is the Missing Source of Direct + Fitness in a Primitively Eusocial Insect}, + journal = {Science}, + year = 2011, + volume = 333, + number = 6044, + pages = {874--876}, + abstract= {Animals that cooperate with nonrelatives represent a +challenge to inclusive fitness theory, unless cooperative behavior is +shown to provide direct fitness benefits. Inheritance of breeding +resources could provide such benefits, but this route to cooperation +has been little investigated in the social insects. We show that nest +inheritance can explain the presence of unrelated helpers in a classic +social insect model, the primitively eusocial wasp Polistes +dominulus. We found that subordinate helpers produced more direct +offspring than lone breeders, some while still subordinate but most +after inheriting the dominant position. Thus, while indirect fitness +obtained through helping relatives has been the dominant paradigm for +understanding eusociality in insects, direct fitness is vital to +explain cooperation in P. dominulus.} } + +@Article{Kiers11, + author = {E. Toby Kiers and Marie Duhamel and Yugandhar Beesetty + and Jerry A. Mensah and Oscar Franken and Erik Verbruggen + and Carl R. Fellbaum and George A. Kowalchuk + and Miranda M. Hart and Alberto Bago and Todd M. Palmer + and Stuart A. West and Philippe Vandenkoornhuyse + and Jan Jansa and Heike B\"ucking}, + title = {Reciprocal Rewards Stabilize Cooperation in the + Mycorrhizal Symbiosis}, + journal = {Science}, + year = 2011, + volume = 333, + number = 6044, + pages = {880--882}, + annote = {Plants and their arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal +symbionts interact in complex underground networks involving multiple +partners. This increases the potential for exploitation and defection +by individuals, raising the question of how partners maintain a fair, +two-way transfer of resources. We manipulated cooperation in plants +and fungal partners to show that plants can detect, discriminate, and +reward the best fungal partners with more carbohydrates. In turn, +their fungal partners enforce cooperation by increasing nutrient +transfer only to those roots providing more carbohydrates. On the +basis of these observations we conclude that, unlike many other +mutualisms, the symbiont cannot be \u201censlaved.\u201d Rather, the +mutualism is evolutionarily stable because control is bidirectional, +and partners offering the best rate of exchange are rewarded.} } + +@Article{Johnson11:Overconfidence, + author = {Johnson, Dominic D.P. and Fowler, James H.}, + title = {The evolution of Overconfidence}, + journal = {Nature}, + year = 2011, + volume = 477, + number = 7364, + pages = {317--320}, + annote = {Confidence is an essential ingredient of success in a +wide range of domains ranging from job performance and mental health +to sports, business and combat1, 2, 3, 4. Some authors have suggested +that not just confidence but overconfidence\u2014believing you are +better than you are in reality\u2014is advantageous because it serves +to increase ambition, morale, resolve, persistence or the credibility +of bluffing, generating a self-fulfilling prophecy in which +exaggerated confidence actually increases the probability of success3, +4, 5, 6, 7, 8. However, overconfidence also leads to faulty +assessments, unrealistic expectations and hazardous decisions, so it +remains a puzzle how such a false belief could evolve or remain stable +in a population of competing strategies that include accurate, +unbiased beliefs. Here we present an evolutionary model showing that, +counterintuitively, overconfidence maximizes individual fitness and +populations tend to become overconfident, as long as benefits from +contested resources are sufficiently large compared with the cost of +competition. In contrast, unbiased strategies are only stable under +limited conditions. The fact that overconfident populations are +evolutionarily stable in a wide range of environments may help to +explain why overconfidence remains prevalent today, even if it +contributes to hubris, market bubbles, financial collapses, policy +failures, disasters and costly wars9, 10, 11, 12, 13.} } + diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/afpsample.pdf b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/afpsample.pdf new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..c05488243a2 Binary files /dev/null and b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/afpsample.pdf differ diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/afpsample.tex b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/afpsample.tex new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..da324f40c88 --- /dev/null +++ b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/afpsample.tex @@ -0,0 +1,117 @@ +\documentclass[1p]{afparticle} +\usepackage{lipsum} +\begin{document} +%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% +% Information about the current issue +%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% +% Volume +\volumenumber{2} +% Issue +\issuenumber{1} +% Year +\publicationyear{2014} +% Number of the paper in the journal +\papernumber{2} +% First page +\startpage{256} +%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% +% Information about the paper +%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% +% Title. If necessary, put the short title in the [..] +\title[Research Title]{Unnecessarily Complicated Research Title} +% Authors. The star denotes thecorressponding author +\author*{John Smith} +\address{Department, University, City, State, Country, Phone, E-mail} +\author{Tom F. Johnson} +\address{Department, University, City, State, Country} +\author{Peter Sellers} +\address{Department, University, City, State, Country} +\author{Jay P. Singh} +\address{Department, University, City, State, Country} +% If necessary, redefine \shortauthors +\renewcommand\shortauthors{John Smith et al} +% Abstract +\begin{abstract} + \lipsum[1] +\end{abstract} +% Keywords +\begin{keyword} + One\sep Two\sep Three +\end{keyword} + +% Technical information +% Reception +\received{April 1, 2013} +% Revision; can be repeated +\revised{May 20, 2013} +\revised{June 15, 2013} +% Acceptance +\accepted{July 30, 2013} + +% Making title +\maketitle + +\section{First section} +\lipsum[2] + +% In-text citation +As shown by \citet{Haidt07}, people are selfish, but morally +motivated. See also the work by +\citet{Stapel08042011}. + +% Parenthetical citations +The method in \citep{Zintzaras10} may help. + +\subsection{A subsection} + +\lipsum[4] + +\subsubsection{A subsubsection} + +%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% +% +% TABLE +% +% Put caption before the table. Use booktabs for table +% formatting +%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% +\begin{table} + \centering + \caption{A sample table} + \label{tab:sample} + \begin{tabular}{lrrr} + \toprule + Item & Units & Cost per unit, \$ & Total cost, \$\\ + \midrule + Stuffed Gnus & 5 & 12.50 & 62.50 \\ + Memory Sticks & 4 & 6.00 & 24.00\\ + \midrule + Total & & & 86.50\\ + \bottomrule + \end{tabular} +\end{table} + + +%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% +% +% FIGURE +% +%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% +\begin{figure} + \centering + \includegraphics{vitruvian} + \caption{A sample figure} + \label{fig:sample} +\end{figure} + +\lipsum[7-21] + + +% Bibliography +\bibliography{afpsample} +\bibliographystyle{apacite} + +% This should be the last command +\printbackmatter + +\end{document} diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/vitruvian.jpg b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/vitruvian.jpg new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..406573b7d0e Binary files /dev/null and b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/afparticle/vitruvian.jpg differ -- cgit v1.2.3