Lesson 6 of 20
Naming things — which attractor is 'cancer'?
A phenotype is an interpretation, not a computation
Everything the computer did up to the last lesson amounts to this — it found four attractors. That is all.
Calling one of them "the malignant cancer state" was us.
The grounds were that a gene named Cancer_Growth is 1,
and giving that gene that name was also us.
This is not a weakness; it is a premise that must be stated out loud. A number like 'cancer 25%' that comes out of a model depends entirely on the naming rule.
Four attractors, and a single digit as the criterion.
Python
Runs in your browser
This is why quoting a number obliges you to say by what criterion it was counted.
Python
Runs in your browser
🎮 Name-tag bench
Change the criterion and watch which cells get counted as 'cancer'.
🤔 Check yourself
A model reports 'cancer states: 25%'. What should you check first?
Answer The calling rule and the denominator are half of any ratio. Change the rule and the same computation turns 25% into 50%, or 100%.
🤔 Check yourself
What is the biggest benefit of writing the phenotype rule down as code?
Answer Falsifiability. A judgement that exists only as words cannot be argued with.
🤔 Check yourself
What is the difference between 'finding an attractor' and 'naming an attractor'?
Answer An attractor is a mathematical consequence of the rules. The label is a biological interpretation. Blur the two and you will believe the model knows more than it does.