Susceptibility to common human diseases such as cancer is influenced by many genetic and environmental factors that work together in a complex manner. The state of the art is to perform a genome-wide association study (GWAS) that measures millions of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) throughout the genome followed by a one-SNP-at-a-time statistical analysis to detect univariate associations. This approach has identified thousands of genetic risk factors for hundreds of diseases. However, the genetic risk factors detected have very small effect sizes and collectively explain very little of the overall heritability of the disease. Nonetheless, it is assumed that the genetic component of risk is due to many independent risk factors that contribute additively. The fact that many genetic risk factors with small effects can be detected is taken as evidence to support this notion. It is our working hypothesis that the genetic architecture of common diseases is partly driven by non-additive interactions. To test this hypothesis, we developed a heuristic simulation-based method for conducting experiments about the complexity of genetic architecture. We show that a genetic architecture driven by complex interactions is highly consistent with the magnitude and distribution of univariate effects seen in real data. We compare our results with measures of univariate and interaction effects from two large-scale GWASs of sporadic breast cancer and find evidence to support our hypothesis that is consistent with the results of our computational experiment.

Animal grouping behaviors have been widely studied due to their implications for understanding social intelligence, collective cognition, and potential applications in engineering, artificial intelligence, and robotics. An important biological aspect of these studies is discerning which selection pressures favor the evolution of grouping behavior. In the past decade, researchers have begun using evolutionary computation to study the evolutionary effects of these selection pressures in predator-prey models. The selfish herd hypothesis states that concentrated groups arise because prey selfishly attempt to place their conspecifics between themselves and the predator, thus causing an endless cycle of movement toward the center of the group. Using an evolutionary model of a predator-prey system, we show that how predators attack is critical to the evolution of the selfish herd. Following this discovery, we show that density-dependent predation provides an abstraction of Hamilton's original formulation of domains of danger . Finally, we verify that density-dependent predation provides a sufficient selective advantage for prey to evolve the selfish herd in response to predation by coevolving predators. Thus, our work corroborates Hamilton's selfish herd hypothesis in a digital evolutionary model, refines the assumptions of the selfish herd hypothesis, and generalizes the domain of danger concept to density-dependent predation.