Paper detail

Information Maximization Fails to Maximize Expected Utility in a Simple Foraging Model

Information theory has explained the organization of many biological phenomena, from the physiology of sensory receptive fields to the variability of certain DNA sequence ensembles. Some scholars have proposed that information should provide the central explanatory principle in biology, in the sense that any behavioral strategy that is optimal for an organism's survival must necessarily involve efficient information processing. We challenge this view by providing a counterexample. We present an analytically tractable model for a particular instance of a perception-action loop: a creature searching for a food source confined to a one-dimensional ring world. The model incorporates the statistical structure of the creature's world, the effects of the creature's actions on that structure, and the creature's strategic decision process. The model takes the form of a Markov process on an infinite dimensional state space. To analyze it we construct an exact coarse graining that reduces the model to a Markov process on a finite number of "information states". This technique allows us to make quantitative comparisons between the performance of an information-theoretically optimal strategy with other candidate strategies on a food gathering task. We find that: 1. Information optimal search does not necessarily optimize utility (expected food gain). 2. The rank ordering of search strategies by information performance does not predict their ordering by expected food obtained. 3. The relative advantage of different strategies depends on the statistical structure of the environment, in particular the variability of motion of the source. We conclude that there is no simple relationship between information and utility. Behavioral optimality does not imply information efficiency, nor is there a simple tradeoff between gaining information about a food source versus obtaining the food itself.

preprint2010arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.