Re: [FRIAM] looking for a word

[Carl Tollander]

There's also a book, "Kinematics of Mixing", which was more exciting than
it sounds, but it seems to have escaped my bookshelf so I don't have an
author handy.


On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 8:00 PM, Carl Tollander  wrote:

> If you are in search of a river analogy word, you might look at "Rivers:
> Form and Process in Alluvial Channels" by Keith Richards.  Chock full of
> terminology and field methods.
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 11:47 AM, uǝlƃ ☣  wrote:
>
>>
>> I need a word (or short phrase) to refer to the portion of a network
>> where the edges converge or diverge (more than other parts of the network.
>> Examples might be a river delta or the branching (debranching?) of blood
>> vessels or lungs.  "Plexus" or "knot" don't work because they could
>> ambiguously refer to something like a tapestry or ... well, a knot, where
>> each thread remains separate, but winds around other threads.  Something
>> close to "canalization" seems appropriate. But I don't want to imply the
>> generation (or dissolution) of the thing.  E.g. [arter|ang]iogenesis are
>> not the type of words I'm looking for.
>>
>> There's got to be a good word for such, perhaps from graph theory or
>> "network theory".  Any help will be rewarded by an IOU for a pint of beer.
>> 8^)
>>
>> --
>> ☣ uǝlƃ
>>
>> 
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
>> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>>
>
>

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] looking for a word

[Carl Tollander]

If you are in search of a river analogy word, you might look at "Rivers:
Form and Process in Alluvial Channels" by Keith Richards.  Chock full of
terminology and field methods.


On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 11:47 AM, uǝlƃ ☣  wrote:

>
> I need a word (or short phrase) to refer to the portion of a network where
> the edges converge or diverge (more than other parts of the network.
> Examples might be a river delta or the branching (debranching?) of blood
> vessels or lungs.  "Plexus" or "knot" don't work because they could
> ambiguously refer to something like a tapestry or ... well, a knot, where
> each thread remains separate, but winds around other threads.  Something
> close to "canalization" seems appropriate. But I don't want to imply the
> generation (or dissolution) of the thing.  E.g. [arter|ang]iogenesis are
> not the type of words I'm looking for.
>
> There's got to be a good word for such, perhaps from graph theory or
> "network theory".  Any help will be rewarded by an IOU for a pint of beer.
> 8^)
>
> --
> ☣ uǝlƃ
>
> 
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] looking for a word

[Marcus Daniels]

Jessica Delacourt is not electable, but Ellen 
Ripley, well, she speaks to 
people.☺



On 8/17/18, 5:42 PM, "Friam on behalf of uǝlƃ ☣"  wrote:



That article paints a fantastic contrast between "speaking to" in an 
ungrounded state vs. "speaking to" in a grounded state.  When speaking to a 
collection of idealists, it's relatively trivial to sidetrack them into some 
region where their evocative triggers are "dog whistles".  But when speaking to 
a collection of skeptics, it's fairly difficult push them into an ungrounded 
region.



But the problem is invariant: that of "speaking to".  Trump beat Clinton, 
hands down, on the "speaking to" front.  "Sophisticated" people, who are used 
to and comfortable with parsing the details of some complicated plan or 
infrastructure, tended to go with Clinton, whereas those of us who would prefer 
our representatives to speak in "poetry", allowing us to fill in the [whatever] 
details, went with Trump.



A fundamental problem these days is "political stalking" and "viral 
memeing".  It's difficult to balance one's presentation to both the nerds and 
the consumers of poetry.  Obama does it fairly well.  Clinton did not.



On 08/17/2018 04:18 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:

> Perhaps 
Texas
 is key to putting a stop to all this?

>

>

>

> On 8/17/18, 4:52 PM, "Friam on behalf of Barry MacKichan" 
 wrote:

>

>

>

> Clusterf**k ?

>

>

>

> Oops, sorry, I was thinking of Trump. Also it’s after 5 on a Friday

>

> here on the east coast.



--

☣ uǝlƃ





FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College

to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove



FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] looking for a word

[Frank Wimberly]

I think of the preferers of poetry as the preferers of simplicity.

---
Frank Wimberly

My memoir:
https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly

My scientific publications:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2

Phone (505) 670-9918

On Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 5:41 PM uǝlƃ ☣  wrote:

> That article paints a fantastic contrast between "speaking to" in an
> ungrounded state vs. "speaking to" in a grounded state.  When speaking to a
> collection of idealists, it's relatively trivial to sidetrack them into
> some region where their evocative triggers are "dog whistles".  But when
> speaking to a collection of skeptics, it's fairly difficult push them into
> an ungrounded region.
>
> But the problem is invariant: that of "speaking to".  Trump beat Clinton,
> hands down, on the "speaking to" front.  "Sophisticated" people, who are
> used to and comfortable with parsing the details of some complicated plan
> or infrastructure, tended to go with Clinton, whereas those of us who would
> prefer our representatives to speak in "poetry", allowing us to fill in the
> [whatever] details, went with Trump.
>
> A fundamental problem these days is "political stalking" and "viral
> memeing".  It's difficult to balance one's presentation to both the nerds
> and the consumers of poetry.  Obama does it fairly well.  Clinton did not.
>
> On 08/17/2018 04:18 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> > Perhaps Texas<
> https://www.thenation.com/article/when-will-the-lone-start-state-turn-blue/>
> is key to putting a stop to all this?
> >
> >
> >
> > On 8/17/18, 4:52 PM, "Friam on behalf of Barry MacKichan" <
> friam-boun...@redfish.com on behalf of barry.mackic...@mackichan.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Clusterf**k ?
> >
> >
> >
> > Oops, sorry, I was thinking of Trump. Also it’s after 5 on a Friday
> >
> > here on the east coast.
>
> --
> ☣ uǝlƃ
>
> 
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] looking for a word

[uǝlƃ ☣]

That article paints a fantastic contrast between "speaking to" in an ungrounded 
state vs. "speaking to" in a grounded state.  When speaking to a collection of 
idealists, it's relatively trivial to sidetrack them into some region where 
their evocative triggers are "dog whistles".  But when speaking to a collection 
of skeptics, it's fairly difficult push them into an ungrounded region.

But the problem is invariant: that of "speaking to".  Trump beat Clinton, hands 
down, on the "speaking to" front.  "Sophisticated" people, who are used to and 
comfortable with parsing the details of some complicated plan or 
infrastructure, tended to go with Clinton, whereas those of us who would prefer 
our representatives to speak in "poetry", allowing us to fill in the [whatever] 
details, went with Trump.

A fundamental problem these days is "political stalking" and "viral memeing".  
It's difficult to balance one's presentation to both the nerds and the 
consumers of poetry.  Obama does it fairly well.  Clinton did not.

On 08/17/2018 04:18 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> Perhaps 
> Texas
>  is key to putting a stop to all this?
> 
> 
> 
> On 8/17/18, 4:52 PM, "Friam on behalf of Barry MacKichan" 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Clusterf**k ?
> 
> 
> 
> Oops, sorry, I was thinking of Trump. Also it’s after 5 on a Friday
> 
> here on the east coast.

-- 
☣ uǝlƃ


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] looking for a word

[Marcus Daniels]

Perhaps 
Texas
 is key to putting a stop to all this?



On 8/17/18, 4:52 PM, "Friam on behalf of Barry MacKichan" 
 wrote:



Clusterf**k ?



Oops, sorry, I was thinking of Trump. Also it’s after 5 on a Friday

here on the east coast.



--Barry





On 17 Aug 2018, at 18:42, uǝlƃ ☣ wrote:



> Bah!  If you are, as I am, a post-modernist, explanatory power reduces

> to evocative power.  Whatever I can do to evoke a predictable response

> in the audience is adequate.  Although I count myself a fan of

> Wittgenstein's STFU approach, I can't deny the power of those who just

> never STFU. (Witness the interminable chants at the various pro-this,

> anti-that rallies.)  It's a kind of hypnosis ... a droning on and on

> until you win over your audience with tone and rhythm more so than

> content.

>

> But w.r.t. Zweigneiderlassung, I'm currently enthralled with McShea

> and Brandon's concept of the ZFEL and "pure complexity", which (in my

> ignorance) disallows reliance on "branching" as a core concept.

> Simple counting seems more appropriate, especially since that makes

> sense to most people.  I admit that McShea and Brandon seem to be

> relying fundamentally on some implicit spatial sense.  But perhaps

> that's OK in this context?

>

> On 08/17/2018 03:21 PM, Robert Holmes wrote:

>> I always call it the Zweigneiderlassung.

>>

>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 4:14 PM Frank Wimberly 

>> wrote:

>>

>>> The explanatory power of all words is limited.  See Wittgenstein.

>>> Wovon

>>> Mann nicht sprechen kann daruber muss Mann schweigen.

>

> --

> ☣ uǝlƃ

>

> 

> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College

> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove





FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College

to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove



FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] looking for a word

[uǝlƃ ☣]

Yes, "face validation" plays a role.  But quantitative "data validation" plays 
a stronger one, as I implied with my reference to "pure complexity".  If I 
could bridge the gap between counting ambiguous things like "sinusoids" and our 
very quantitative analog, then it would be relatively easy to not only Turing 
test the analog's output against people who look at tissue slices, but it would 
be easier to automate such validation (including with ML and ANN).

But it all starts with being able to *describe* what these fractal-like 
structures look like.  Not having a word or catchy phrase seriously inhibits 
our ability to communicate.  If you're there in meat space, you can dangle your 
fingers on the top and wiggle the fingers of your other hand on bottom to 
indicate the "interesting region" where your fingers are wiggling.  But when 
limited to a text interface, it's a difficult concept to grok.

On 08/17/2018 03:57 PM, Robert Wall wrote:
> Glen,
> 
> I believe what you are trying to achieve is what we used to call "face
> validity."  To achieve accreditation among the domain experts, the model
> had to appeal on an empathic level or it was toast. This was not easy to do
> at the program level (DAG?) but easier to do a higher level of abstracted
> modeling (organic level).  Beyond that, the model had to produce outcomes
> (verification) that the model was not, say just overfitting the data.
> 
> So it seems you are saying that you are trying to convey an organic feel
> from a mechanistic process. With Herny Markam's Blue Brain project, for
> example, I think they were doing this same thing by starting with a digital
> reconstruction of recognizable parts of a mouse brain's neocortex.
> Analogously, I think, you are starting with a digital reconstruction of a
> rat's liver lobules.
> 
> So the wordsmith challenge is to describe how the mechanistic structure
> overlay one-for-one on to the organic structure.  I would think that this
> relationship must be functional.  Not sure.
> 
> This understanding doesn't "answer the mail" for you but it might help with
> the wordsmithing.

-- 
☣ uǝlƃ


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] looking for a word

[uǝlƃ ☣]

"Peneplain" is a very cool word that you just taught me.  But I think that's 
too well-mixed.  In terms of the liver, the (3D) peneplain might be simply the 
central vein that flows out after all the filtering is done.  I want to 
indicate the region "just prior" to the peneplain ... or just after the the 
portal vein, where blood flows in.

The reason for avoiding concepts of growth/evolution is because we (*I*, my 
colleagues might not approve of my asking a mailing list of random nerds) need 
to contrast one "fluvial network" with another.  And, especially in the case of 
disease, we'll need to indicate a "healthy state", which I suspect involves a 
nice space-filling structure, versus an unhealthy state, which shows too much 
flow, not enough filtering.

The idea is that the different morphology between a healthy and unhealthy state 
can hint at various treatments.  Growth, repair, etc. will be part and parcel 
of any such treatment.  But first, it would be nice to be able to refer to the 
different "homology" exhibited by the 2 different states.  And "yes", the 
reason "persistent homology" is attractive is because the same property should 
apply when considering an acinus, as well as a lobule, as well as a whole 
liver.  To boot, it would be nice if such a property would be applicable to 
structures like the pancreas as well as the liver.


On 08/17/2018 03:48 PM, Steven A Smith wrote:
> Your description makes me think of (as you may intend) of the braiding
> of rivulets within a delta (or any flat section of river, alluvial fan,
> or pleneplain) if I understand the dynamics at all, sedimentation is
> deposited relatively uniformly, causing a "flat" region and the most
> minor of differences define where water will canalize... and variations
> over time of those differences (wind, rates of evaporation, etc) lead to
> *multiple* channels which appear to be independent of one another, even
> crossing.   When they "cross" I am left to wonder if they are formed or
> flow concurrently or represent an evolution over time where many may
> carry water at one time, but as flow increases, one (or another) is
> preferred for a time, reinforcing an old or cutting a new channel.  
> Braided rivers are considered distinct from Meandering rivers, but I
> wonder if that isn't just a (time)scale difference?  I have been
> casually studying the Platte ("flat") River for unrelated reasons...
> 
> This is part of the reason for asking about the function(s) of the
> system(s) you are studying.
> 
> You seem to want to avoid any implications of growth...  does that mean
> you don't expect the structure to reflect a response to some dynamic
> element or to not have "evolved" from something more simple (like from a
> very sparse or fully connected graph to the one in question)?
> 
> I am also curious (in a hair splitting way) about your (Marcus' ?) use
> of homology in this context.   Would you be referring to the patterns of
> similarity across subgraphs of the whole graph?  When you invoked
> fractal, I heard an implication of patterns of similarity at different
> scales.

-- 
☣ uǝlƃ


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] looking for a word

[Robert Wall]

Glen,

I believe what you are trying to achieve is what we used to call "face
validity."  To achieve accreditation among the domain experts, the model
had to appeal on an empathic level or it was toast. This was not easy to do
at the program level (DAG?) but easier to do a higher level of abstracted
modeling (organic level).  Beyond that, the model had to produce outcomes
(verification) that the model was not, say just overfitting the data.

So it seems you are saying that you are trying to convey an organic feel
from a mechanistic process. With Herny Markam's Blue Brain project, for
example, I think they were doing this same thing by starting with a digital
reconstruction of recognizable parts of a mouse brain's neocortex.
Analogously, I think, you are starting with a digital reconstruction of a
rat's liver lobules.

So the wordsmith challenge is to describe how the mechanistic structure
overlay one-for-one on to the organic structure.  I would think that this
relationship must be functional.  Not sure.

This understanding doesn't "answer the mail" for you but it might help with
the wordsmithing.

Robert

On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 4:28 PM uǝlƃ ☣  wrote:

> Interesting.  Robert's mention of "fractally-associative" was attractive
> to me and seems similar to your [dis]assortativity.  But I'm too ignorant
> (so far) to know whether that has any heuristic power.
>
> I now owe ~4 pints, but only have any confidence I'll have to pay up on 1.
> 8^)
>
> Here's the context.  In our *analogy* from our computational model of the
> liver to a referent liver, we use a directed graph (without degenerate
> cycles) to simulate the lobules in various livers (perfused rat, whole
> animal mouse, etc.).  In that graph, some of the "sinusoidal segments" feed
> into our "central vein".  But they do so in a computationally coherent way
> that is physically incoherent. It's a DAG.  The edges don't actually
> *conduct* the molecules.  It's a magical attachment.  One of my more
> biologically inclined colleagues was trying to analogize to the referent
> liver, which is much more ... "organic" ... whereas our analog is much more
> ... "schematic", if that makes any sense.  My colleague is attempting to
> point out the difference between an actual liver's complex "bed" of flowing
> integration versus our analog's engineered ... "managed" ... "magical" ...
> transference.
>
> Part of my motivation for posting this question, here, is that I'm
> pitching for us to implement a more "space-filling" lobule structure than
> that exhibited by our current DAG.  Although my colleague thinks I'm
> arguing against him, I'm actually trying to bolster his argument that, in
> order to build a *strong* structural analogy (and thereby a strong
> behavioral analogy), we might need a computational structure that is more
> analogous to the referent lobule.
>
> And part of my *rhetoric* requires a relatively catchy word/phrase to use
> to indicate our our current DAG is easily face-falsifiable.
>
>
> On 08/17/2018 01:37 PM, Steven A Smith wrote:
> > Glen -
> >
> > I haven't converged on precisely what you are looking for here...   but
> > am fascinated with the question.
> >
> > My best guess at the general area you are contemplating would involve
> > the graph theoretic idea of a "cluster" and/or imply something about
> > (dis)assortativity.I think maybe what you are talking about are
> > (collections of) nodes with high local clustering coefficients and I
> > *think* with high assortativity.  If I understand your question, Marcus'
> > suggestions, and the finer points of these graph measures, a typical
> > "hub" in the normal sense would have high disassortativity, or in
> > laymans terms, nodes with high degree would connect more to nodes with
> > low degree, etc.  while what you are looking for might be nodes with
> > (relatively) high degree *and*  high assortativity, or nodes that
> > connect to nodes of similar degree...
> >
> > I know this is far from providing "a word"...  but the resulting phrase
> > might be "an assortative cluster" or "a cluster with high assortativity"?
> >
> > Can you say anything more about the underlying system being modeled?
> > Are you trying to fit this to the known/observed structure or it's
> > function, or one implying the other?
>
>
> --
> ☣ uǝlƃ
>
> 
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] looking for a word

[Barry MacKichan]

Clusterf**k ?

Oops, sorry, I was thinking of Trump. Also it’s after 5 on a Friday 
here on the east coast.


--Barry


On 17 Aug 2018, at 18:42, uǝlƃ ☣ wrote:

Bah!  If you are, as I am, a post-modernist, explanatory power reduces 
to evocative power.  Whatever I can do to evoke a predictable response 
in the audience is adequate.  Although I count myself a fan of 
Wittgenstein's STFU approach, I can't deny the power of those who just 
never STFU. (Witness the interminable chants at the various pro-this, 
anti-that rallies.)  It's a kind of hypnosis ... a droning on and on 
until you win over your audience with tone and rhythm more so than 
content.


But w.r.t. Zweigneiderlassung, I'm currently enthralled with McShea 
and Brandon's concept of the ZFEL and "pure complexity", which (in my 
ignorance) disallows reliance on "branching" as a core concept.  
Simple counting seems more appropriate, especially since that makes 
sense to most people.  I admit that McShea and Brandon seem to be 
relying fundamentally on some implicit spatial sense.  But perhaps 
that's OK in this context?


On 08/17/2018 03:21 PM, Robert Holmes wrote:

I always call it the Zweigneiderlassung.

On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 4:14 PM Frank Wimberly  
wrote:


The explanatory power of all words is limited.  See Wittgenstein.  
Wovon

Mann nicht sprechen kann daruber muss Mann schweigen.


--
☣ uǝlƃ


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove



FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] looking for a word

[Steven A Smith]

Glen -

hmmm...  "Plexus" as a portmanteau of Plectic and Nexus then?

I sense in your groping/grasping/grappling for this word/phrase that you
are seeking *both* explicit and implicit connectivity?   "Weaving"
suggests to me that you are thinking implicit connections as much as
explicit your use of "Confluent Flow" suggests function/dynamism rather
than structure.

Your description makes me think of (as you may intend) of the braiding
of rivulets within a delta (or any flat section of river, alluvial fan,
or pleneplain) if I understand the dynamics at all, sedimentation is
deposited relatively uniformly, causing a "flat" region and the most
minor of differences define where water will canalize... and variations
over time of those differences (wind, rates of evaporation, etc) lead to
*multiple* channels which appear to be independent of one another, even
crossing.   When they "cross" I am left to wonder if they are formed or
flow concurrently or represent an evolution over time where many may
carry water at one time, but as flow increases, one (or another) is
preferred for a time, reinforcing an old or cutting a new channel.  
Braided rivers are considered distinct from Meandering rivers, but I
wonder if that isn't just a (time)scale difference?  I have been
casually studying the Platte ("flat") River for unrelated reasons...

This is part of the reason for asking about the function(s) of the
system(s) you are studying.

You seem to want to avoid any implications of growth...  does that mean
you don't expect the structure to reflect a response to some dynamic
element or to not have "evolved" from something more simple (like from a
very sparse or fully connected graph to the one in question)?

I am also curious (in a hair splitting way) about your (Marcus' ?) use
of homology in this context.   Would you be referring to the patterns of
similarity across subgraphs of the whole graph?  When you invoked
fractal, I heard an implication of patterns of similarity at different
scales.

- Steve

> I *really* want to use some form of "plectic" like plexus or complex.  But 
> its explanatory power is limited.  As I'll soon respond to Steve, I need 
> something that evokes the concept of merging/confluent flow but without the 
> overtones of generation (like Robert's growth/dynamism).  Even the 
> "filtration" concept derived from Marcus' suggestion of persistent homology, 
> implies a temporal component.
>
>
> On 08/17/2018 01:03 PM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
>> Complex junction?




FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] looking for a word

[uǝlƃ ☣]

Bah!  If you are, as I am, a post-modernist, explanatory power reduces to 
evocative power.  Whatever I can do to evoke a predictable response in the 
audience is adequate.  Although I count myself a fan of Wittgenstein's STFU 
approach, I can't deny the power of those who just never STFU. (Witness the 
interminable chants at the various pro-this, anti-that rallies.)  It's a kind 
of hypnosis ... a droning on and on until you win over your audience with tone 
and rhythm more so than content.

But w.r.t. Zweigneiderlassung, I'm currently enthralled with McShea and 
Brandon's concept of the ZFEL and "pure complexity", which (in my ignorance) 
disallows reliance on "branching" as a core concept.  Simple counting seems 
more appropriate, especially since that makes sense to most people.  I admit 
that McShea and Brandon seem to be relying fundamentally on some implicit 
spatial sense.  But perhaps that's OK in this context?

On 08/17/2018 03:21 PM, Robert Holmes wrote:
> I always call it the Zweigneiderlassung.
> 
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 4:14 PM Frank Wimberly  wrote:
> 
>> The explanatory power of all words is limited.  See Wittgenstein.  Wovon
>> Mann nicht sprechen kann daruber muss Mann schweigen.

-- 
☣ uǝlƃ


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] looking for a word

[uǝlƃ ☣]

Interesting.  Robert's mention of "fractally-associative" was attractive to me 
and seems similar to your [dis]assortativity.  But I'm too ignorant (so far) to 
know whether that has any heuristic power.

I now owe ~4 pints, but only have any confidence I'll have to pay up on 1. 8^)

Here's the context.  In our *analogy* from our computational model of the liver 
to a referent liver, we use a directed graph (without degenerate cycles) to 
simulate the lobules in various livers (perfused rat, whole animal mouse, 
etc.).  In that graph, some of the "sinusoidal segments" feed into our "central 
vein".  But they do so in a computationally coherent way that is physically 
incoherent. It's a DAG.  The edges don't actually *conduct* the molecules.  
It's a magical attachment.  One of my more biologically inclined colleagues was 
trying to analogize to the referent liver, which is much more ... "organic" ... 
whereas our analog is much more ... "schematic", if that makes any sense.  My 
colleague is attempting to point out the difference between an actual liver's 
complex "bed" of flowing integration versus our analog's engineered ... 
"managed" ... "magical" ... transference.

Part of my motivation for posting this question, here, is that I'm pitching for 
us to implement a more "space-filling" lobule structure than that exhibited by 
our current DAG.  Although my colleague thinks I'm arguing against him, I'm 
actually trying to bolster his argument that, in order to build a *strong* 
structural analogy (and thereby a strong behavioral analogy), we might need a 
computational structure that is more analogous to the referent lobule.

And part of my *rhetoric* requires a relatively catchy word/phrase to use to 
indicate our our current DAG is easily face-falsifiable.


On 08/17/2018 01:37 PM, Steven A Smith wrote:
> Glen -
> 
> I haven't converged on precisely what you are looking for here...   but
> am fascinated with the question.
> 
> My best guess at the general area you are contemplating would involve
> the graph theoretic idea of a "cluster" and/or imply something about
> (dis)assortativity.    I think maybe what you are talking about are
> (collections of) nodes with high local clustering coefficients and I
> *think* with high assortativity.  If I understand your question, Marcus'
> suggestions, and the finer points of these graph measures, a typical
> "hub" in the normal sense would have high disassortativity, or in
> laymans terms, nodes with high degree would connect more to nodes with
> low degree, etc.  while what you are looking for might be nodes with
> (relatively) high degree *and*  high assortativity, or nodes that
> connect to nodes of similar degree...
> 
> I know this is far from providing "a word"...  but the resulting phrase
> might be "an assortative cluster" or "a cluster with high assortativity"?
> 
> Can you say anything more about the underlying system being modeled? 
> Are you trying to fit this to the known/observed structure or it's
> function, or one implying the other?


-- 
☣ uǝlƃ


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] looking for a word

[Robert Holmes]

I always call it the Zweigneiderlassung.

On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 4:14 PM Frank Wimberly  wrote:

> The explanatory power of all words is limited.  See Wittgenstein.  Wovon
> Mann nicht sprechen kann daruber muss Mann schweigen.
>
> ---
> Frank Wimberly
>
> My memoir:
> https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly
>
> My scientific publications:
> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2
>
> Phone (505) 670-9918
>
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 4:11 PM uǝlƃ ☣  wrote:
>
>> I *really* want to use some form of "plectic" like plexus or complex.
>> But its explanatory power is limited.  As I'll soon respond to Steve, I
>> need something that evokes the concept of merging/confluent flow but
>> without the overtones of generation (like Robert's growth/dynamism).  Even
>> the "filtration" concept derived from Marcus' suggestion of persistent
>> homology, implies a temporal component.
>>
>>
>> On 08/17/2018 01:03 PM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
>> > Complex junction?
>>
>> --
>> ☣ uǝlƃ
>>
>> 
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
>> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>>
> 
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] looking for a word

[Frank Wimberly]

The explanatory power of all words is limited.  See Wittgenstein.  Wovon
Mann nicht sprechen kann daruber muss Mann schweigen.

---
Frank Wimberly

My memoir:
https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly

My scientific publications:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2

Phone (505) 670-9918

On Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 4:11 PM uǝlƃ ☣  wrote:

> I *really* want to use some form of "plectic" like plexus or complex.  But
> its explanatory power is limited.  As I'll soon respond to Steve, I need
> something that evokes the concept of merging/confluent flow but without the
> overtones of generation (like Robert's growth/dynamism).  Even the
> "filtration" concept derived from Marcus' suggestion of persistent
> homology, implies a temporal component.
>
>
> On 08/17/2018 01:03 PM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
> > Complex junction?
>
> --
> ☣ uǝlƃ
>
> 
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] looking for a word

[uǝlƃ ☣]

I *really* want to use some form of "plectic" like plexus or complex.  But its 
explanatory power is limited.  As I'll soon respond to Steve, I need something 
that evokes the concept of merging/confluent flow but without the overtones of 
generation (like Robert's growth/dynamism).  Even the "filtration" concept 
derived from Marcus' suggestion of persistent homology, implies a temporal 
component.


On 08/17/2018 01:03 PM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
> Complex junction?

-- 
☣ uǝlƃ


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] looking for a word

[Marcus Daniels]

I immediately think of Geoffrey West’s work.  (Although that doesn’t 
immediately provide a catchy phrase.)

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/276/5309/122

From: Friam  on behalf of Robert Wall 

Reply-To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
Date: Friday, August 17, 2018 at 1:32 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] looking for a word

Here's a paper   (2010) that describes a 
hub attraction dynamical growth model (HADGM) that exhibits fractal and 
probabilistic behavior for forming nodes in a complex network.

But you are looking for a descriptive word or phrase. Perhaps, "dynamic growth 
models with fractally-associative (or nonassociative) hubs."  It seems to have 
something to do with the behavior of forming nodes (connections); so that seems 
to be the focus for your description. Not sure, but would agree that fractile 
behavior seems at the root of what you are trying to describe: some "hubbing" 
and "hubbing-resistance," so to speak.

I like the amber Belgian beers ... 😋


On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 12:52 PM uǝlƃ ☣ 
mailto:geprope...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Excellent!  I suppose the things I'm talking about would exhibit something like 
a persistent homology.  Of course, I'm looking for a word to describe a subset 
of those (the particular way something like a capillary bed branches out from 
the large blood vessels).  So, it would have to be a type of persistent 
homology.

But the concept of "a filtration" is also evocative, both in its math and 
biological/physical meanings.  Much of what the tissue samplers are doing is 
counting/indexing objects and branches in an attempt to identify weirdness.

On 08/17/2018 11:28 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> Persistent homology?

--
☣ uǝlƃ


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] looking for a word

[Steven A Smith]

Glen -

I haven't converged on precisely what you are looking for here...   but
am fascinated with the question.

My best guess at the general area you are contemplating would involve
the graph theoretic idea of a "cluster" and/or imply something about
(dis)assortativity.    I think maybe what you are talking about are
(collections of) nodes with high local clustering coefficients and I
*think* with high assortativity.  If I understand your question, Marcus'
suggestions, and the finer points of these graph measures, a typical
"hub" in the normal sense would have high disassortativity, or in
laymans terms, nodes with high degree would connect more to nodes with
low degree, etc.  while what you are looking for might be nodes with
(relatively) high degree *and*  high assortativity, or nodes that
connect to nodes of similar degree...

I know this is far from providing "a word"...  but the resulting phrase
might be "an assortative cluster" or "a cluster with high assortativity"?

Can you say anything more about the underlying system being modeled? 
Are you trying to fit this to the known/observed structure or it's
function, or one implying the other?

- Steve


On 8/17/18 12:52 PM, uǝlƃ ☣ wrote:
> Excellent!  I suppose the things I'm talking about would exhibit something 
> like a persistent homology.  Of course, I'm looking for a word to describe a 
> subset of those (the particular way something like a capillary bed branches 
> out from the large blood vessels).  So, it would have to be a type of 
> persistent homology.
>
> But the concept of "a filtration" is also evocative, both in its math and 
> biological/physical meanings.  Much of what the tissue samplers are doing is 
> counting/indexing objects and branches in an attempt to identify weirdness.
>
> On 08/17/2018 11:28 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
>> Persistent homology?




FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] looking for a word

[Frank Wimberly]

Complex junction?

---
Frank Wimberly

My memoir:
https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly

My scientific publications:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2

Phone (505) 670-9918

On Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 1:31 PM Robert Wall  wrote:

> Here's a paper  (2010) that
> describes a hub attraction dynamical growth model (HADGM) that exhibits
> fractal and probabilistic behavior for forming nodes in a complex network.
>
> But you are looking for a descriptive word or phrase. Perhaps, "dynamic
> growth models with fractally-associative (or nonassociative) hubs."  It
> seems to have something to do with the behavior of forming nodes
> (connections); so that seems to be the focus for your description. Not
> sure, but would agree that fractile behavior seems at the root of what you
> are trying to describe: some "hubbing" and "hubbing-resistance," so to
> speak.
>
> I like the amber Belgian beers ... 😋
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 12:52 PM uǝlƃ ☣  wrote:
>
>> Excellent!  I suppose the things I'm talking about would exhibit
>> something like a persistent homology.  Of course, I'm looking for a word to
>> describe a subset of those (the particular way something like a capillary
>> bed branches out from the large blood vessels).  So, it would have to be a
>> type of persistent homology.
>>
>> But the concept of "a filtration" is also evocative, both in its math and
>> biological/physical meanings.  Much of what the tissue samplers are doing
>> is counting/indexing objects and branches in an attempt to identify
>> weirdness.
>>
>> On 08/17/2018 11:28 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
>> > Persistent homology?
>>
>> --
>> ☣ uǝlƃ
>>
>> 
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
>> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>>
> 
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] looking for a word

[Robert Wall]

Here's a paper  (2010) that describes
a hub attraction dynamical growth model (HADGM) that exhibits fractal and
probabilistic behavior for forming nodes in a complex network.

But you are looking for a descriptive word or phrase. Perhaps, "dynamic
growth models with fractally-associative (or nonassociative) hubs."  It
seems to have something to do with the behavior of forming nodes
(connections); so that seems to be the focus for your description. Not
sure, but would agree that fractile behavior seems at the root of what you
are trying to describe: some "hubbing" and "hubbing-resistance," so to
speak.

I like the amber Belgian beers ... 😋


On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 12:52 PM uǝlƃ ☣  wrote:

> Excellent!  I suppose the things I'm talking about would exhibit something
> like a persistent homology.  Of course, I'm looking for a word to describe
> a subset of those (the particular way something like a capillary bed
> branches out from the large blood vessels).  So, it would have to be a type
> of persistent homology.
>
> But the concept of "a filtration" is also evocative, both in its math and
> biological/physical meanings.  Much of what the tissue samplers are doing
> is counting/indexing objects and branches in an attempt to identify
> weirdness.
>
> On 08/17/2018 11:28 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> > Persistent homology?
>
> --
> ☣ uǝlƃ
>
> 
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] looking for a word

[uǝlƃ ☣]

Excellent!  I suppose the things I'm talking about would exhibit something like 
a persistent homology.  Of course, I'm looking for a word to describe a subset 
of those (the particular way something like a capillary bed branches out from 
the large blood vessels).  So, it would have to be a type of persistent 
homology.

But the concept of "a filtration" is also evocative, both in its math and 
biological/physical meanings.  Much of what the tissue samplers are doing is 
counting/indexing objects and branches in an attempt to identify weirdness.

On 08/17/2018 11:28 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> Persistent homology?

-- 
☣ uǝlƃ


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] looking for a word

[Marcus Daniels]

Persistent homology?

On 8/17/18, 12:09 PM, "Friam on behalf of uǝlƃ ☣"  wrote:

Maybe.  But I tend to think of a hub as a kind of homogenous mixing point.  
E.g. a bicycle hub has all the spokes connnecting to the hub at equal 
distances.  For water flow, something like a sewage treatment plant might have 
a reservoir into which pipes or canals feed, where the pipes/canals are all 
roughly the same length and enter the reservoir at similar distances and 
(possible) flow rates (pipe sizes, etc.).

A river confluence, for example, might have 2 streams merge at one point, 
then a 3rd stream merge in later,  a stream merging with a big stream, etc.  
So, there's some implication that the merging/branching is heterogeneous.

Abstracting the detail of such a thing would definitely make it some sort 
of "mixing hub".  But it wouldn't be "well-mixed" if you zoomed in.  All 
concrete hubs (e.g. Unilever in a supply chain model or whatnot) *do* have some 
sort of internal structure you can see when you zoom in, though.  So, maybe a 
qualified phrase like "fractal hub" would work?


On 08/17/2018 10:53 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> A hub?
> 
> On 8/17/18, 11:47 AM, "Friam on behalf of uǝlƃ ☣" 
 wrote:
> 
> 
> I need a word (or short phrase) to refer to the portion of a network 
where the edges converge or diverge (more than other parts of the network.  
Examples might be a river delta or the branching (debranching?) of blood 
vessels or lungs.  "Plexus" or "knot" don't work because they could ambiguously 
refer to something like a tapestry or ... well, a knot, where each thread 
remains separate, but winds around other threads.  Something close to 
"canalization" seems appropriate. But I don't want to imply the generation (or 
dissolution) of the thing.  E.g. [arter|ang]iogenesis are not the type of words 
I'm looking for.
> 
> There's got to be a good word for such, perhaps from graph theory or 
"network theory".  Any help will be rewarded by an IOU for a pint of beer. 8^)


-- 
☣ uǝlƃ


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove



FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] looking for a word

[uǝlƃ ☣]

Maybe.  But I tend to think of a hub as a kind of homogenous mixing point.  
E.g. a bicycle hub has all the spokes connnecting to the hub at equal 
distances.  For water flow, something like a sewage treatment plant might have 
a reservoir into which pipes or canals feed, where the pipes/canals are all 
roughly the same length and enter the reservoir at similar distances and 
(possible) flow rates (pipe sizes, etc.).

A river confluence, for example, might have 2 streams merge at one point, then 
a 3rd stream merge in later,  a stream merging with a big stream, etc.  So, 
there's some implication that the merging/branching is heterogeneous.

Abstracting the detail of such a thing would definitely make it some sort of 
"mixing hub".  But it wouldn't be "well-mixed" if you zoomed in.  All concrete 
hubs (e.g. Unilever in a supply chain model or whatnot) *do* have some sort of 
internal structure you can see when you zoom in, though.  So, maybe a qualified 
phrase like "fractal hub" would work?


On 08/17/2018 10:53 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> A hub?
> 
> On 8/17/18, 11:47 AM, "Friam on behalf of uǝlƃ ☣"  on behalf of geprope...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> I need a word (or short phrase) to refer to the portion of a network 
> where the edges converge or diverge (more than other parts of the network.  
> Examples might be a river delta or the branching (debranching?) of blood 
> vessels or lungs.  "Plexus" or "knot" don't work because they could 
> ambiguously refer to something like a tapestry or ... well, a knot, where 
> each thread remains separate, but winds around other threads.  Something 
> close to "canalization" seems appropriate. But I don't want to imply the 
> generation (or dissolution) of the thing.  E.g. [arter|ang]iogenesis are not 
> the type of words I'm looking for.
> 
> There's got to be a good word for such, perhaps from graph theory or 
> "network theory".  Any help will be rewarded by an IOU for a pint of beer. 8^)


-- 
☣ uǝlƃ


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] looking for a word

[Marcus Daniels]

A hub?

On 8/17/18, 11:47 AM, "Friam on behalf of uǝlƃ ☣"  wrote:


I need a word (or short phrase) to refer to the portion of a network where 
the edges converge or diverge (more than other parts of the network.  Examples 
might be a river delta or the branching (debranching?) of blood vessels or 
lungs.  "Plexus" or "knot" don't work because they could ambiguously refer to 
something like a tapestry or ... well, a knot, where each thread remains 
separate, but winds around other threads.  Something close to "canalization" 
seems appropriate. But I don't want to imply the generation (or dissolution) of 
the thing.  E.g. [arter|ang]iogenesis are not the type of words I'm looking for.

There's got to be a good word for such, perhaps from graph theory or 
"network theory".  Any help will be rewarded by an IOU for a pint of beer. 8^)

-- 
☣ uǝlƃ


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove



FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

[FRIAM] looking for a word

[uǝlƃ ☣]

I need a word (or short phrase) to refer to the portion of a network where the 
edges converge or diverge (more than other parts of the network.  Examples 
might be a river delta or the branching (debranching?) of blood vessels or 
lungs.  "Plexus" or "knot" don't work because they could ambiguously refer to 
something like a tapestry or ... well, a knot, where each thread remains 
separate, but winds around other threads.  Something close to "canalization" 
seems appropriate. But I don't want to imply the generation (or dissolution) of 
the thing.  E.g. [arter|ang]iogenesis are not the type of words I'm looking for.

There's got to be a good word for such, perhaps from graph theory or "network 
theory".  Any help will be rewarded by an IOU for a pint of beer. 8^)

-- 
☣ uǝlƃ


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove