Document

# Amplifiers for the Moran Process

## File

LIPIcs.ICALP.2016.62.pdf
• Filesize: 0.48 MB
• 13 pages

## Cite As

Andreas Galanis, Andreas Göbel, Leslie Ann Goldberg, John Lapinskas, and David Richerby. Amplifiers for the Moran Process. In 43rd International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming (ICALP 2016). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 55, pp. 62:1-62:13, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2016)
https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.ICALP.2016.62

## Abstract

The Moran process, as studied by Lieberman, Hauert and Nowak, is a randomised algorithm modelling the spread of genetic mutations in populations. The algorithm runs on an underlying graph where individuals correspond to vertices. Initially, one vertex (chosen uniformly at random) possesses a mutation, with fitness r > 1. All other individuals have fitness 1. During each step of the algorithm, an individual is chosen with probability proportional to its fitness, and its state (mutant or non-mutant) is passed on to an out-neighbour which is chosen uniformly at random. If the underlying graph is strongly connected then the algorithm will eventually reach fixation, in which all individuals are mutants, or extinction, in which no individuals are mutants. An infinite family of directed graphs is said to be strongly amplifying if, for every r > 1, the extinction probability tends to 0 as the number of vertices increases. Strong amplification is a rather surprising property - it means that in such graphs, the fixation probability of a uniformly-placed initial mutant tends to 1 even though the initial mutant only has a fixed selective advantage of r > 1 (independently of n). The name "strongly amplifying" comes from the fact that this selective advantage is "amplified". Strong amplifiers have received quite a bit of attention, and Lieberman et al. proposed two potentially strongly-amplifying families - superstars and metafunnels. Heuristic arguments have been published, arguing that there are infinite families of superstars that are strongly amplifying. The same has been claimed for metafunnels. We give the first rigorous proof that there is an infinite family of directed graphs that is strongly amplifying. We call the graphs in the family "megastars". When the algorithm is run on an n-vertex graph in this family, starting with a uniformly-chosen mutant, the extinction probability is roughly n^{-1/2} (up to logarithmic factors). We prove that all infinite families of superstars and metafunnels have larger extinction probabilities (as a function of n). Finally, we prove that our analysis of megastars is fairly tight - there is no infinite family of megastars such that the Moran algorithm gives a smaller extinction probability (up to logarithmic factors). Also, we provide a counterexample which clarifies the literature concerning the isothermal theorem of Lieberman et al. A full version [Galanis/Göbel/Goldberg/Lapinskas/Richerby, Preprint] containing detailed proofs is available at http://arxiv.org/abs/1512.05632. Theorem-numbering here matches the full version.
##### Keywords
• Moran process
• randomised algorithm on graphs
• evolutionary dynamics

## Metrics

• Access Statistics
• Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
0

## References

1. B. Adlam, K. Chatterjee, and M. A. Nowak. Amplifiers of selection. Proceedings of the Royal Society A, 471(2181), 2015.
2. Chalee Asavathiratham, Sandip Roy, Bernard Lesieutre, and George Verghese. The influence model. IEEE Control Systems, 21(6):52-64, 2001.
3. Eli Berge. Dynamic monopolies of constant size. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B, 83(2):191-200, 2001.
4. Carol Bezuidenhout and Geoffrey Grimmett. The critical contact process dies out. Ann. Probab., 18(4):1462-1482, 10 1990. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/aop/1176990627.
5. M. Broom and J. Rychtár. An analysis of the fixation probability of a mutant on special classes of non-directed graphs. Proceedings of the Royal Society A, 464:2609-2627, 2008.
6. J. Díaz, L. A. Goldberg, G. B. Mertzios, D. Richerby, M. J. Serna, and P. G. Spirakis. On the fixation probability of superstars. Proceedings of the Royal Society A, 469(2156):20130193, 2013.
7. J. Díaz, L. A. Goldberg, G. B. Mertzios, D. Richerby, M. J. Serna, and P. G. Spirakis. Approximating fixation probabilities in the generalised Moran process. Algorithmica, 69(1):78-91, 2014.
8. Josep Díaz, Leslie Ann Goldberg, David Richerby, and Maria J. Serna. Absorption time of the Moran process. Random Structures and Algorithms, To Appear.
9. Richard Durrett and Jeffrey E. Steif. Fixation results for threshold voter systems. Ann. Probab., 21(1):232-247, 01 1993. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/aop/1176989403.
10. Rick Durrett. Some features of the spread of epidemics and information on random graphs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 107(10):4491-4498, 2010.
11. Andreas Galanis, Andreas Göbel, Leslie Ann Goldberg, John Lapinskas, and David Richerby. Amplifiers for the Moran process. Preprint.
12. Herbert Gintis. Game Theory Evolving: A Problem-Centered Introduction to Modeling Strategic Interaction. Princeton University Press, 2000.
13. C. Hauert. Evolutionary dynamics. In A. T. Skjeltorp and A. V. Belushkin, editors, Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Study Institute on Evolution from Cellular to Social Scales, pages 11-44. Springer, 2008.
14. A. Jamieson-Lane and C. Hauert. Fixation probabilities on superstars, revisited and revised. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 382:44-56, 2015.
15. David Kempe, Jon Kleinberg, and Éva Tardos. Maximizing the spread of influence through a social network. In Proc. 9th ACM International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pages 137-146. ACM, 2003.
16. E. Lieberman, C. Hauert, and M. A. Nowak. Evolutionary dynamics on graphs. Nature, 433(7023):312-316, 2005. Supplementary material available at URL: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v433/n7023/full/nature03204.html.
17. Thomas M. Liggett. Stochastic Interacting Systems: Contact, Voter and Exclusion Processes. Springer, 1999.
18. George B. Mertzios, Sotiris E. Nikoletseas, Christoforos Raptopoulos, and Paul G. Spirakis. Natural models for evolution on networks. Theor. Comput. Sci., 477:76-95, 2013. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tcs.2012.11.032.
19. George B. Mertzios and Paul G. Spirakis. Strong bounds for evolution in networks. In Automata, Languages, and Programming - 40th International Colloquium, ICALP 2013, Riga, Latvia, July 8-12, 2013, Proceedings, Part II, pages 669-680, 2013. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39212-2_58.
20. P. A. P. Moran. Random processes in genetics. Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 54(1):60-71, 1958.
21. Devavrat Shah. Gossip algorithms. Found. Trends Netw., 3(1):1-125, January 2009. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1561/1300000014.
22. P. Shakarian, P. Roos, and A. Johnson. A review of evolutionary graph theory with applications to game theory. BioSystems, 107(2):66-80, 2012.
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing

### Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

### Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail