Skip to main content
Log in

Equation or Algorithm: Differences and Choosing Between Them

  • Regular Article
  • Published:
Acta Biotheoretica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The issue of whether formal reasoning or a computing-intensive approach is the most efficient manner to address scientific questions is the subject of some considerable debate and pertains not only to the nature of the phenomena and processes investigated by scientists, but also the nature of the equation and algorithm objects they use. Although algorithms and equations both rely on a common background of mathematical language and logic, they nevertheless possess some critical differences. They do not refer to the same level of symbolization, as equations are based on integrated concepts in a denotational manner, while algorithms specifically break down a complex problem into more elementary operations, in an operational manner. They may therefore be considered as suited to the representation of different phenomena. Specifically, algorithms are by nature sufficient to represent weak emergent phenomena, but not strong emergent patterns, while equations can do both. Finally, the choice between equations and algorithms are by nature sufficient to represent weak emergent phenomena, but not strong emergent patterns, while equations behave conversely. We propose a simplified classification of scientific issues for which both equation- and/or algorithm-based approaches can be envisaged, and discuss their respective pros and cons. We further discuss the complementary and sometimes conflicting uses of equations and algorithms in a context of ecological theory of metapopulation dynamics. We finally propose both conceptual and practical guidelines for choosing between the alternative approaches.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aubin D (1997) The withering immortality of Nicolas Bourbaki: a cultural connector at the confluence of mathematics. Sci Context 10:297–342

    Google Scholar 

  • Bascompte J (2001) Aggregate statistical measures and metapopulation dynamics. J Theor Biol 209:373–379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bascompte J (2003) Extinction threshold: insights from simple models. Ann Zool Fennici 40:99–114

    Google Scholar 

  • Bascompte J, Sole RV (1996) Habitat fragmentation and extinction thresholds in spatially explicit models. J Anim Ecol 65(4):465–473

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bedau MA (2008) Is weak emergence just in the mind? Mind Mach 18(4):443–459

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berec L (2002) Techniques of spatially explicit individual-based models: construction, simulation, and mean-field analysis. Ecol Model 150(1–2):55–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolker B, Pacala SW (1997) Using moment equations to understand stochastically driven spatial pattern formation in ecological systems. Theor Popul Biol 52:179–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boogerd FC, Bruggeman FJ, Richardson RC, Stephan A, Westerhoff HV (2005) Emergence and its place in nature: a case study of biochemical networks. Synthese 145:131–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broad CD (1919) Mechanical explanation and its alternatives. Proc Aristotelian Soc 19:86–124

    Google Scholar 

  • Broad CD (1925) In: Kegan Paul T (ed) The mind and its place in nature. Trubner & Co, London

  • Buchberger B (1976) Theoretical basis for the reduction of polynomials to canonical forms. ACM SIGSAM Bull 10(3):19–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burris SN, Sankappanavar HP (1981) A course in universal algebra. Springer Verlag, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Church A (1941) The calculi of lambda-conversion. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Cormen TH, Leiserson CE, Rivest RL, Stein C (2001) (eds) Introduction to algorithms, 2nd edn. The Massasuchetts Institute of Technology, USA

  • Dewdney AK (1985) Analog gadgets that solve a diversity of problems and raise an array of questions. Sci Am 252(5):18–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein J (1999) Agent-based computational models and generative social science. Complexity 4(5):41–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faugeras B, Maury O (2007) Modeling fish population movements: from an individual-based representation to an advection-diffusion equation. J Theor Biol 247(4):837–848

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gödel K (1931) Über formal unentscheidbare Sätze der principia mathematica und verwandter systeme. I. Monatshefte für Mathematik und Physik 38:173–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gosselin F (1999) Test of mathematical assumptions behind the ‘incidence function’ estimation process of metapopulations’ dynamic parameters. Math Biosci 159(1):21–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hales TC (2001) The honeycomb conjecture. Discrete Comput Geom 25(1):1–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I (1997) Predictive and practical metapopulation models: the incidence function approach. In: Tilman D, Kareiva P (eds) Spatial ecology—the role of space in population dynamics and interspecific interactions. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 21–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I (1998) Metapopulation dynamics. Nature 396:41–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanski IA, Gilpin ME (eds) (1997) Metapopulation biology, vol 1. Academic Press, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoare CAR (1999) A theory of programming: denotational, algebraic and operational semantics, in, http://www.research.microsoft.com/users/thoare/A_theory_of_programming.pdf

  • Humphreys P (2004) Extending ourselves: computational science, empiricism, and scientific method. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Humphreys P (2008) Synchronic and diachronic emergence. Mind Mach 18(4):431–442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huneman P (2008) Emergence made ontological? computational versus combinatorial approaches. Philos Sci 75(5):595–607

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huneman P, Humphreys P (2008) Dynamical emergence and computation: an introduction. Mind Mach 18(4):425–430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keeling MJ (2002) Using individual-based simulations to test the Levins metapopulation paradigm. J Anim Ecol 71(2):270–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lande R (1987) Extinction thresholds in demographic models of territorial populations. Am Nat 130:624–635

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latour B (1987) Science in action, how to follow scientists and engineers through society. Harvard University Press, Cambridge Mass

    Google Scholar 

  • Law R, Murrell DJ, Dieckmann U (2003) Population growth in space and time: spatial logistic equations. Ecology 84(1):252–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levi M (2009) The mathematical mechanic: using physical reasoning to solve problems. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Levins R (1966) Strategy of model building in population biology. Am Sci 54(4):421

    Google Scholar 

  • Levins R (1969) Some demographic and genetic consequences of environmental heterogeneity for biological control. Bull Entomol Soc Am 15:237–240

    Google Scholar 

  • Morin E (1982) Science avec conscience. Vol. (new edition). Collection Points, Fayard

    Google Scholar 

  • Munoz F, Cheptou P-O, Kjellberg F (2007) Spectral analysis of simulated species distribution maps provides insights into metapopulation dynamics. Ecol Model 105:314–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ovaskainen O, Sato K, Bascompte J, Hanski I (2002) Metapopulation models for extinction threshold in spatially correlated landscapes. J Theor Biol 215:95–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peck SL (2004) Simulation as experiment: a philosophical reassessment for biological modeling. Trends Ecol Evol 19(10):530–534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plotkin GD (2004) A structural approach to operational semantics. J Log Algebraic Program 60–61:17–139

    Google Scholar 

  • Saccheri I, Kuussaari M, Kankare M, Vikman P, Fortelius W, Hanski I (1998) Inbreeding and extinction in a butterfly metapopulation. Nature 392

  • Schmidt DA (1986) Denotational semantics. A methodology for language development. Allyn and Bacon, Inc., Boston

  • Shapiro S (1997) Philosophy of mathematics: structure and ontology. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Solé RV, Manrubia SC, Benton M, Kauffman S, Bak P (1999) Criticality and scaling in evolutionary ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 14(4):156–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephan A (1999) Varieties of emergentism. Evol Cogn 5(1):49–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Szpiro G (2003) Mathematics: does the proof stack up? Nature 424(6944):12–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turing AM (1936) On computable numbers, with an application to the entscheidungsproblem. Proc Lond Math Soc 2(42):230–265

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner R, Eden AH (2007) The philosophy of computer science: introduction to the special issue. Mind Mach 17(2):129–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vuorinen V, Peltomaki M, Rost M, Alava MJ (2004) Networks in metapopulation dynamics. Euro Phys J B 38(2):261–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wigner E (1982) On science and its evolution. J Phys 43(NC-8):435–438

    Google Scholar 

  • With KA, King AW (1999) Extinction thresholds for species in fractal landscapes. Conserv Biol 13(2):314–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfram S (2002) A new kind of science. Wolfram media, Champaign

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the organizers of the European Conference on Computing And Philosophy (ECAP 2008). We warmly thank P. Huneman for advices on an earlier version of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. Gaucherel.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gaucherel, C., Bérard, S. & Munoz, F. Equation or Algorithm: Differences and Choosing Between Them. Acta Biotheor 59, 67–79 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10441-010-9119-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10441-010-9119-4

Keywords

Navigation