Technological Fitness and Coherence explanation. Schematic representation of the workings of the Fitness and Complexity algorithm and Coherence diversification.
<p>In the top panel, we show the computation of the Fitness and Complexity algorithm. The Fitness of the entity <i>e</i><sub>1</sub> is the technological Complexity sum of all the technology done by <i>e</i><sub>1</sub>. Regarding the Complexity,...
محفوظ في:
| المؤلف الرئيسي: | |
|---|---|
| مؤلفون آخرون: | , |
| منشور في: |
2025
|
| الموضوعات: | |
| الوسوم: |
إضافة وسم
لا توجد وسوم, كن أول من يضع وسما على هذه التسجيلة!
|
| الملخص: | <p>In the top panel, we show the computation of the Fitness and Complexity algorithm. The Fitness of the entity <i>e</i><sub>1</sub> is the technological Complexity sum of all the technology done by <i>e</i><sub>1</sub>. Regarding the Complexity, for <i>t</i><sub>4</sub> it is high because entities do it with high Fitness. Instead, <i>t</i><sub>1</sub> has a low Complexity because is done by <i>e</i><sub>4</sub> which has a low Fitness. In other words, we can see <i>e</i><sub>1</sub>, <i>e</i><sub>2</sub> and <i>e</i><sub>3</sub> as technologically advanced entities, so if <i>t</i><sub>4</sub> is made only by these it means that it is a technology that is, indeed, complex. Unlike the previous ones, <i>e</i><sub>4</sub> does not have the same technological development, and since this one can produce <i>t</i><sub>1</sub> together with the other entities it implies that <i>t</i><sub>1</sub> has low Complexity. At the bottom, we explain the idea of Coherence diversification. Both figures offer a simplified representation of the network of technologies <b>S</b>. Each node is a technology and the links quantify if technologies are connected, i.e., if they are similar and if the capabilities required to develop both are approximately the same. The coloured nodes are the technologies made by entity <i>e</i><sub>1</sub> and <i>e</i><sub>2</sub>, respectively. Entity <i>e</i><sub>1</sub> has a high Coherence value concerning <i>t</i><sub>1</sub> since its technology portfolio has very closely related elements. In contrast, <i>e</i><sub>2</sub> has a portfolio with disconnected technologies and consequently has a low Coherence value.</p> |
|---|