CREED, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Elife. 2018 Oct 15;7:e41901. doi: 10.7554/eLife.41901.
How generally Hamilton's rule holds is a much debated question. The answer to that question depends on how costs and benefits are defined. When using the regression method to define costs and benefits, there is no scope for violations of Hamilton's rule. We introduce a general model for assortative group compositions to show that, when using the counterfactual method for computing costs and benefits, there is room for violations. The model also shows that there are limitations to observing violations in equilibrium, as the discrepancies between Hamilton's rule and the direction of selection may imply that selection will take the population out of the region of disagreement, precluding observations of violations in equilibrium. Given what it takes to create a violation, empirical tests of Hamilton's rule, both in and out of equilibrium, require the use of statistical models that allow for identifying non-linearities in the fitness function.
汉密尔顿规则的普遍适用性是一个备受争议的问题。这个问题的答案取决于成本和收益的定义方式。当使用回归方法来定义成本和收益时，就不存在违反汉密尔顿规则的情况。我们引入了一个用于群体组成的一般性模型，以表明当使用反事实方法来计算成本和收益时，就存在违反的空间。该模型还表明，在均衡状态下观察到违反的情况是有限的，因为汉密尔顿规则与选择方向之间的差异可能意味着选择将使种群脱离分歧区域，从而排除了在均衡状态下观察到违反的情况。鉴于违反规则的条件，汉密尔顿规则的实证检验，无论是在均衡状态还是非均衡状态下，都需要使用允许识别适应度函数中非线性的统计模型。
