A Social Computing-Based Analysis on Monogamous Marriage Puzzle of Human

Most of the mammal species hold polygynous mating systems. The majority of the marriage systems of mankind were also polygynous over civilized history; however, socially imposed monogamy gradually prevails throughout the world. This is difficult to understand because those mostly influential in society are themselves benefitted from polygyny. Actually, the puzzle of monogamous marriage could be explained by a simple mechanism, which lies in the sexual selection dynamics of civilized human societies, driven by wealth redistribution. The discussions in this paper are mainly based on the approach of social computing, with a combination of both experimental and analytical analysis.

[1]  C. Bauch,et al.  Disease dynamics and costly punishment can foster socially imposed monogamy , 2016, Nature Communications.

[2]  Monique Borgerhoff Mulder,et al.  Bateman's principles and human sex roles , 2009, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[3]  David Wakefield,et al.  Fenjia: Household Division and Inheritance in Qing and Republican China , 1998 .

[4]  Zhong Wang,et al.  Dynamic Output Feedback Guaranteed-Cost Synchronization for Multiagent Networks With Given Cost Budgets , 2018, IEEE Access.

[5]  B. V. Gomes,et al.  Female dispersion and sex ratios interact in the evolution of mating behavior: a computational model , 2018, Scientific Reports.

[6]  David Herlihy,et al.  Biology and history: the triumph of monogamy. , 1995 .

[7]  M. Feldman,et al.  The Co-evolution of Individual Behaviors and Social Institutions , 2022 .

[8]  Andrey Korotayev,et al.  Polygyny and Democracy: A Cross-Cultural Comparison , 2000 .

[9]  Fei-Yue Wang,et al.  Back to the Future: Surrogates, Mirror Worlds, and Parallel Universes , 2011, IEEE Intell. Syst..

[10]  Jian Zhou,et al.  On Performance of Peer Review for Academic Journals: Analysis Based on Distributed Parallel System , 2019, IEEE Access.

[11]  Hillard S. Kaplan,et al.  Greater wealth inequality, less polygyny: rethinking the polygyny threshold model , 2018, Journal of The Royal Society Interface.

[12]  Shou-De Lin,et al.  Social Flocks: Simulating Crowds to Discover the Connection Between Spatial-Temporal Movements of People and Social Structure , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems.

[13]  Robert Boyd,et al.  The puzzle of monogamous marriage , 2012, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[14]  M. A. Fye,et al.  Understanding How Couples Maintain Monogamy: The Development of a Theory of Protective Factors Using Grounded Theory. , 2018 .

[15]  T. Piketty.  Capital in the twenty-first century: a multidimensional approach to the history of capital and social classes. , 2013, The British journal of sociology.

[16]  T. Clutton‐Brock.  Review Lecture: Mammalian mating systems , 1989, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. B. Biological Sciences.

[17]  Haisheng Yu,et al.  A New Perspective to Graphical Characterization of Multiagent Controllability , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics.

[18]  U. Fischbacher,et al.  The nature of human altruism , 2003, Nature.

[19]  J. Henrich.  Cultural group selection, coevolutionary processes and large-scale cooperation , 2004 .

[20]  R. Boyd,et al.  The evolution of altruistic punishment , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[21]  Napoleon A. Chagnon,et al.  Evolutionary biology and human social behavior: An anthropological perspective , 1979 .

[22]  Lena Edlund,et al.  Sex Ratios and Crime: Evidence from China’s One-Child Policy , 2007 .

[23]  Ming He,et al.  On Almost Controllability of Dynamical Complex Networks with Noises , 2017, J. Syst. Sci. Complex..

[24]  William A. Searcy,et al.  Experimental confirmation of the polygyny threshold model for red–winged blackbirds , 2001, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[25]  Jafar Habibi,et al.  The Affective Evolution of Social Norms in Social Networks , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems.

[26]  Shuangshuang Han,et al.  Cyber-Physical-Social Systems: The State of the Art and Perspectives , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems.

[27]  Fei-Yue Wang,et al.  Toward a Paradigm Shift in Social Computing: The ACP Approach , 2007, IEEE Intell. Syst..

[28]  Clark Spencer Larsen,et al.  Equality for the sexes in human evolution? Early hominid sexual dimorphism and implications for mating systems and social behavior , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[29]  Walter Scheidel,et al.  A peculiar institution? Greco–Roman monogamy in global context , 2009 .

[30]  Cheng Wang,et al.  Completely Distributed Guaranteed-Performance Consensualization for High-Order Multiagent Systems With Switching Topologies , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems.

[31]  Bobbi S. Low,et al.  Marriage Systems and Pathogen Stress in Human Societies , 1990 .

[32]  Luděk Berec,et al.  Impacts of infection avoidance for populations affected by sexually transmitted infections. , 2018, Journal of theoretical biology.

[33]  M. Archetti,et al.  Evolution of monogamous marriage by maximization of inclusive fitness , 2010, Journal of evolutionary biology.

[34]  Chong Lin,et al.  Fast Consensus Seeking on Networks with Antagonistic Interactions , 2018, Complex..