Code center > Suggestions
Sexual Reproduction Focus Group
Numsgil:
I would say my primary motive for desiring sexual reproduction is that others desire it. It is quite common for people to want to run a simulation experimenting with sex. I've seen several users come and go for this reason.
Allowing the sexual reproduction to be created from more basic commands has a problem with backwards compatibility. Not impossible to resolve, but still quite noteworthy. .repro is a perfect reproduction method, as opposed to Avida where the entire genome is concerned with reproduction. If sexrepro is orders of magnitude more complex than .repro, we have a problem of a slanted fitness landscape where sex is concerned.
To resolve it, should we wish, we could generate a sequence of very basic commands to operate on the DNA, and have .repro act as a modifiable macro, perhaps using codules or some such.
I am of the strong opinion that we need to move as much of the program away from the gene as a fundamental unit. DNA should be treated more as a long strip of magnetic tape and less like a collection of pearls on a necklace, if that makes sense. Especially since modern gene structure can be quite peculiar and convoluted.
Carlo:
--- Quote from: Numsgil ---I would say my primary motive for desiring sexual reproduction is that others desire it. It is quite common for people to want to run a simulation experimenting with sex. I've seen several users come and go for this reason.
--- End quote ---
Well, if you don't know your goal, no surprise you don't have clear ideas on how to reach it.
--- Quote ---Allowing the sexual reproduction to be created from more basic commands has a problem with backwards compatibility. Not impossible to resolve, but still quite noteworthy. .repro is a perfect reproduction method, as opposed to Avida where the entire genome is concerned with reproduction. If sexrepro is orders of magnitude more complex than .repro, we have a problem of a slanted fitness landscape where sex is concerned.
--- End quote ---
I don't see why sexual and asexual reproduction, or even complex/new style repro and old simple .repro, should cohabit in the same simulation. Sex seems to be per se not competitive with asexual reproduction, at least in the DB world. (This don't necessarily means that there's something wrong with DB: maybe sex just needs huge and complex environments to develop and be advantageous). So I would simply allow to run simulations with sexual repro, without worrying about its complexity or competitivity. Later, but much later, one can think of creating a more AVIDA-like control over genetic material to allow, through the same mechanisms, both asexual and sexual repro.
--- Quote ---To resolve it, should we wish, we could generate a sequence of very basic commands to operate on the DNA, and have .repro act as a modifiable macro, perhaps using codules or some such.
--- End quote ---
As I just said, it would be a completely different project. The problems to address now are (at least) those four points I listed in my previous post.
--- Quote ---I am of the strong opinion that we need to move as much of the program away from the gene as a fundamental unit. DNA should be treated more as a long strip of magnetic tape and less like a collection of pearls on a necklace, if that makes sense. Especially since modern gene structure can be quite peculiar and convoluted.
--- End quote ---
That's again another project, which has almost nothing to do with sex.
Bye,
Carlo
Carlo:
By the way, could anybody tell me what's so wrong with .sexrepro?
Thanks
PurpleYouko:
--- Quote ---By the way, could anybody tell me what's so wrong with .sexrepro?
--- End quote ---
Nothing really (in concept) It just doesn't seem to work.
Also it does not give either parent a real choice in the who the other one will be as it takes the DNA of the nearest bot in physical space to combine with its own.
Elite:
Actually, after some experimentation in 2.37.6 with a .sexrepro-using Animal Minimalis, it doesn't seem that bad at first glance. Slightly buggy in some areas (ie. no reproduction collision detection) but not that bad
My first worry was that the sexreproing bot would combine with a veg or an entirely different bot, but the code seems to prohibit sexual reproduction if the genomes are two dissimilar
My only concern is that, as PY said, there's no way to choose your 'mate' - you just get your DNA yanked out of you if you're nearest
How about having .sexrepro fire a tie forward, which, on hiting another bot, takes that bot's DNA and mixes it with the original bot in a manner similar to the original .sexrepro
That way you can choose your mate by hunting round, say for a bot with more than a certain energy or kills (ie. allows for sexual selection), and then aquiring it's DNA through a sex-tie
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version