search

simoncarrignon / mixed-transmission

GNU General Public License v3.0
1 stars 0 forks source link

Probability to get married #8

Closed simoncarrignon closed 11 months ago

simoncarrignon commented 1 year ago

The model describes $m$ , the probability to get married.

What do we want this $m$ to intuitively represent? how to translate/explain that?

Here is one way I implemented marrriage:

   ##marriage
   population[,"age"]>=maturity & population[,"partner"]<0
   single_male  =which(potential & population[,"sex"]==0)
   single_female=which(potential & population[,"sex"]==1)
   weds=sum(runif(min(length(single_male),length(single_female)))<m)

This selects, among the minimal group of people that can potentially get married, a number proportional to $m$. Here "minimal" means that if you have in total 23 individual who reached maturity and are still not married, you will split these individual between male and female, and take in average $m$ percent of the smallest group between male or female. Maybe not the most intuitive way to use this $m$ but if I just select $m$ percent of any of the people that can potentially be married ; if there is a big gender unbalance, then we may not reach this percentage (but that's probably not a big deal?).

I am sure there are many other way to approach/see this parameter.

ercrema commented 1 year ago

That looks good for me - I had something similar in mind, but this is far more efficiently coded

simoncarrignon commented 11 months ago

Realising that didn't insure that marriage are made out of the community.

A question question ot both @ercrema and @annenna4 , if we enforce newly married couple to be both from different community, should the choice of community be done regardless of the 'type' (ie the adaptive traits) of the communities?

Should we have a system to check when and how often people from one type of community can marry people from other type of community? or just unsure that in a couple people are always from different community regardless of the adaptive traits?

ercrema commented 11 months ago

Ah tricky one - I think it's easier to justify the potential mate to be someone in spatial proximity rather than involving adaptive traits