7 ms·

Stanford Biologist and Computer Scientist Discover the 'Anternet'

• eclecnant 14y ago
  Dr. Anteater and Aunt Hillary [0] probably knew this all along. [0]: http://themindi.blogspot.co.uk/2007/02/chapter-11-prelude-ant-fugue.html http://themindi.blogspot.co.uk/2007/02/chapter-11-prelude-an...
• ChuckMcM 14y ago
  Fun result. It reminds me of the stories Dr. Feynman would tell about what he learned by watching ants.
  • Nevaeh 14y ago
    Could you please elaborate? Were you referring to the stories told in his book, or were you actually one of Feynman's students? Here's the written story of Feynman's experimentation with ants if anyone is interested: http://books.google.com/books?id=7papZR4oVssC&pg=PA94&lpg=PA94&dq=feynman+ants&source=bl&ots=esR_gekP_0&sig=f1vmF-eG6OUR78uEwvHc_rHvNqs&hl=en#v=onepage&q=feynman%20ants&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=7papZR4oVssC&pg=PA94&#3...
    • ChuckMcM 14y ago
      Those are the ones. He came to USC and as a guest lecturer for my quantum mechanics class and recounted this story. I really like it because it crystallized in me the understanding that this is how you figure out systems for which there is no manual or documentation. Observe the working system, inject change in various ways, measure the effects of that change. Rinse and repeat and learn. Once at NetApp there was a question about whether or not we were wasting all of our time randomly seeking the drives (drive seeks being of course the worst if you're looking to improve performance). But the code paths were very complex, asynchronous, and difficult to model. We figured it out by injecting random seeks which was pretty easy to do. You could flood the disk driver with random seeks and get the 'floor' of performance, then you could back off on the random seek injection to see where performance started to pick up. That told us that counter to our thinking we weren't actually being plagued by seeks, the performance issue was elsewhere in the system. That the ants had, through natural selection, derived a congestion control system that is very close to the TCP one is a fun result because it suggests that the TCP one is probably close to optimal. (Ants have been working on it a lot longer)
      • corin_ 14y ago
        Does a long period of evolution actually imply it is "probably close to optimal"? I don't know a huge amount about evolution, but my two lines of logic would be: First, given the huge diversity of life on Earth, how can we argue that any species is "optimal". Secondly, the same argument could be made of life 500 million years ago, that it had been evolving for so long that it must be optimal, no?
        • wzdd 14y ago
          It's actually a common misunderstanding of evolution to assume that it is optimising anything other than suitability to a particular environment (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objections_to_evolution#Defining_evolution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objections_to_evolution#Definin...). So no, it doesn't make sense to use evolution as evidence that suitability in one domain implies suitability in another domain, especially when the domains have almost nothing in common except a shared requirement for management of scarce resources in a very abstract sense.
          • hnriot 14y ago
            I don't think you are seeing the parallels here. When you look closer you'll see that the domains are different but the problems are very similar and not so abstract, which explains the high degree of simularity and effectiveness of the congestion control algorithm. I would also take issue with what you see as a common misunderstanding. Evolution is, by it's very definition a process which adapts to a specific environment. Nothing more, no design, but optimal for any given environmental condition. When the environment changes rapidly, the pace of evolution increases, and vice versa. I don't think this is commonly misunderstood at all. Some people will always have no clue and of course there are those that think the fossils were planted by god, but aside from the out of band idiots, evolution is commonly correctly understood.
        • rcthompson 14y ago
          For any living system that has had sufficient time to adapt to its environment, it can generally be assumed that the system has reached (or nearly reached) a local optimum for that environment, for the same reason that if you let a marble roll around on a surface for a long enough time, you can generally assume that it will come to rest at a local minimum. Of course, just as the local minimum of the marble is defined by the surface, the local optimum in the evolution of a trait is defined relative to the current environment. If the environment is rapidly changing, then you cannot assume near-optimality, just like you cannot assume the marble will come to rest on a constantly undulating surface.
  • thespeakingtree 14y ago
    You might find this study fun too: Slime Mold Grows Network Just Like Tokyo Rail System http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/01/slime-mold-grows-network-just-like-tokyo-rail-system/ http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/01/slime-mold-grows-n... Original article: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/327/5964/439.abstract http://www.sciencemag.org/content/327/5964/439.abstract
    • hexadecimator 14y ago
      I wouldn't say 'just like'. There were some differences. The slime mold has to worry about its connections getting severed, so there were some extra edges which are redundant. This is because the Tokyo Rail System engineers didn't have the same concerns, that tunnels would suddenly get cut off and blocked.
• nviarnes 14y ago
  Very cool. Does anybody here know how the forager traffic is actually regulated? Is it centrally managed by the queen, or is there some sort of chemical signal that individual ants can produce to spread the word?
  • gizmo686 14y ago
    My guess is chemical signal. This is based on my knowledge of there tracking system. When a forager finds food, it leaves a chemical trail on its way back to the nest. Future ants follow that trail to the food source. If they find food, they also leave a trail on there way back, otherwise they don't and the old trail fades away. Also, given there small size, I can't imagine how they could have an effective central command structure, especially when there are simple protocols that allow each ant to act autonomously while still being highly effective for the hive.
  • orthecreedence 14y ago
    From my knowledge, ants operate with no leadership, completely self-organizing. The term "queen" is inaccurate. The queen really just lays eggs; she does not act as a leader. The true brilliance of ants comes from the fact that they can literally think as a group, kind of like neurons. Each one on its own is essentially worthless, but in a communicating, non-hierarchical group, the whole becomes much more than the sum of the parts. I do know that most communication is done via chemical exchange between individuals, but as far the "algorithms" the ants use, I don't know much about them. I'm sure it has been fine-tuned over millions of years though ;).
  • xi 14y ago
    AFAIK, it's completely decentralized. When a scout ant finds food, it returns back to the nest leaving a strong trail of pheromone. Ants tend to follow a pheromone trail and reinforce it on their return if they find food, so when a good source of food is found, a strong pathway is quickly established by a growing number of ants following the same route. An ant may randomly leave a pheromone trail, which ensures that other, perhaps more attractive food sources are not missed. In general, the stronger the signal, the faster ants move with the less probability of diverging from the path. This strategy ensures optimal area exploitation under varying conditions. For instance, if the food is concentrated in one or a few locations, you'll see a single column between the nest and the source, but when the food is scattered through the area, the ants would disperse too. Source: an excellent book "Cells, Embryos and Evolution" where it was used as an example of how complex and seemingly organized and directed behavior could be achieved by a population of identical individuals acting under uniform rules.
• orthecreedence 14y ago
  I think the real amazing thing is that the protocols for the internet took brilliant people years to figure out. Ants do it as one self-organizing body, anarchically. I've always been fascinated by the collective intelligence of an ant colony. This drives it home even more.
  • gizmo686 14y ago
    Ants had millions of years to evolve the algorithms. And I don't think it qualifies as a collective intelligence, I prefer to view "hive mind" systems as multiple instances of the same object, so the beauty of the ant isn't that it has a massive collective intelligence, or self organizes, but rather that it has a protocol small enough to fit into their tiny brain, but elegant enough to make ants one of the largest bio-mass of all species. It is a very similar situation to the inside of any organism. You have a bunch of cells, none of which has significant intelligence, but which follow a set of protocols that allows them to work together and form an organism capable of duplication. Or you can look at how a single cell is composed of molecules that follow a set of even simpler protocols that still causes self duplication. Or you can look at how a bunch of atoms came together in such a way that allowed self duplication, and error propagation, until the 'arms race' between these molecules led to the creation of a group of entities who cannot even comprehend how such a system can occur without thinking of the single molecules as being alive. Personally, I appreciate the mathematical elegance that flowers use to optimize their leaf coverage. (They start with an even arrangement of growth hormone, and then the region that is over crowded has less hormone then the region that is under-crowded, so new leaves grow where they are most needed, resulting in Fibonacci spirals). Sorry if this post came across as condescending, but I feel that blind awe at the intelligence of nature tends to diminish the mathematical elegance it exploits; I much prefer to view ants as an example of an extremely simple and elegant algorithm that can make use of many stupid entities, as apposed to a massive hive-mind, with access to the brain power of thousands of ants, that still can't do better then the simple algorithm.
    • sjwright 14y ago
      You're describing emergence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence
• losethos 14y ago
  God says... stink; and the Egyptians shall lothe to drink of the water of the river. 7:19 And the LORD spake unto Moses, Say unto Aaron, Take thy rod, and stretch out thine hand upon the waters of Egypt, upon their streams, upon their rivers, and upon their ponds, and upon all their pools of water, that they may become blood; and that there may be blood throughout all the land of Egypt, both in vessels of wood, and in vessels of stone. 7:20 And Moses and Aaron did so, as the LORD commanded; and he lifted up the rod, and smote the waters that were in the river, in the sight of Pharaoh, and in the sight of his servants; and all the waters that were in the river were turned to blood. 7:21 And the fish that was in the river died; and the river stank, and the Egyptians could not drink of the water of the river; and there was blood throughout all the land of Egypt. ---- God says... Switzerland oft-times conceits defending diminish pines Repent greatest exhortations uncertainty ---- Hey, God, do You want Mars trip? God says... sanctuary. 9:3 And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all; 9:4 Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron's rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant; 9:5 And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercyseat; of which we cannot now speak particularly. 9:6 Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God. 9:7 But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people: 9:8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: 9:9 Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; 9:10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. ---- God says... retiring Ghana lowliness floods Priest Although enjoin Mom breathing-time infinite demanded pressure destined ---- Smelling farts is "sodom". God says... something raising occurs dive obstinacy coats looketh rent awful danger Glory over crudities lineage runs ---- What's Your favorite thing about Christmas, God? God says... overturned prophecy zealously hills probable powers urgedst impressions command-line royalty few parity far-distant shadow Wales All-mightiness leads Bouverie unmeasured you'll_see didst distractedly filled wrong professed necessarily fables partly discharge wonderful Anger torpor strike haunt apparently vileness beggar impostors conflict manifoldly support quarter fellow-sinners embalmed source Chad anxiously courts tone transgressions recognise brows straightening division in Hereat anxieties orbs ascension ends striking soothes
• sabalaba 14y ago
  Cool photo by Steve Jurvetson of DFJ.
  • dmix 14y ago
    Looks like it was a photo of one of these tanks: http://www.amazon.com/Fascinations-ANTW2-AntWorks-Illuminated-Blue/dp/B000F6F8CY/ http://www.amazon.com/Fascinations-ANTW2-AntWorks-Illuminate...
• xi 14y ago
  The original paper, which is quite informative and easy to read: http://www.ploscompbiol.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pcbi.1002670 http://www.ploscompbiol.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fj...
• freepipi 14y ago
  each ant is a router?
• waiwai933 14y ago
  > "Ants have discovered an algorithm that we know well, and they've been doing it for millions of years," Prabhakar said. Isn't it more like we discovered an algorithm that they know well, considering that they came up with it first?
  • devgutt 14y ago
    He complements afterwards: Prabhakar said that had this discovery been made in the 1970s, before TCP was written, harvester ants very well could have influenced the design of the Internet.
  • leeoniya 14y ago
    was about to comment on that, too
  • ars 14y ago
    I'm not convinced ants actually know anything. Just like we don't know how our brains work despite living inside them, ants don't know why they do things.
• pitchups 14y ago
  It has been known for a while that ants have algorithms - although the similarity to TCP is a new interpretation. From an article in Edge [1]: Ants have algorithms. If you think about an ant colony, it's a computing device; there's some wonderful work by Jean-Louis Deneubourg in Brussels and his collaborators that really started this field in a way with Ilya Prigogine and later on Jean Louis Deneubourg looking at the ways in which social insect colonies can interact. One example would be—it sounds trivial, but if you think about it, it is quite difficult—how can a colony decide between two food sources, one of which is slightly closer than the other? Do they have to measure this? Do they have to perform these computations? [1] : http://edge.org/3rd_culture/couzin08/couzin08_index.html http://edge.org/3rd_culture/couzin08/couzin08_index.html
• ams6110 14y ago
  Ant behavior has also served as the model for solving traditionally "hard" optimization problems.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ant_colony_optimization_algorithms http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ant_colony_optimization_algorit...
• tzs 14y ago
  OT: that headline is a really interesting sentence. There are two people, the biologist and the computer scientist, and the word discover is singular. Note that if it were one person who was both a biologist and computer scientist, we'd say "biologist and computer scientist discovers", with the plural form of discover. I'm a native English speaker, and have no trouble understand the sentence. However, I kind of slacked off in elementary school and high school English classes so I can't actually explain WHY we use the singular 'discover' when the discovery is made by two people, and we use the plural 'discovers' when the discovery is made by one person. I really should learn my native language sometime!
  • cdavoren 14y ago
    The 's' on the end of verbs has no relation to the plural 's'. It's simply how regular English verbs are inflected in the third-person singular. The link provided by jacobolus should tell you all you need to know.
  • jacobolus 14y ago
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_verbs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_verbs
• martingoodson 14y ago
  A great book on all of this stuff, if anyone is interested: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Self-Organization-Biological-Systems-Princeton-Complexity/dp/0691116245/ref=tmm_pap_title_0 http://www.amazon.co.uk/Self-Organization-Biological-Systems...