General > Biology
Sharks and grass
Botsareus:
Num it will work fine in the system by Shvartz , better , we can try bouth systems just to prove that it will work fine in any, (Just save a backup copy of the Project)
Then we can see if PY+NUM system works better then SHVARTZ system.
I dont know so I am not taking sides.
Ok lets do an example picture of how Shvartz method and Num+Py method are the same:
lets say enzymes or whatever are A,B,C, and D
In nums method there are 1 of A 3 of B 2 of C 4 of D (too lazy to rewrite in %)
In Shvartz method its
Start
D '1
C '1<---
A '1
D '2
B '1
C '2 <---
D '3
B '2
B '3 <--
D '4 <--
Stop
Math Time
3 = 3
4 = 4
2 = 2
1 = 1
cya later alegater :D
shvarz:
--- Quote ---we should add some kind of incentive to selectively use enzymes
--- End quote ---
There would be: using all enzymes requires upkeep, using only some requires less upkeep.
--- Quote ---Maybe the more you produce an enzyme the cheaper it is to produce.
--- End quote ---
and
--- Quote ---A more active method is to make enzymes cheaper to produce
--- End quote ---
seem the same to me. But both are reasonable.
--- Quote ---work better the fewer types you have in your stomach
--- End quote ---
This I don't like. Does not make much sense. It should be the other way around - the more different enzymes you have, the easier it it is to digest stuff made from several kinds of compounds. Imagine dissasembling a car using only philips screwdriver (even if you have a hundred of them) - not an easy task :)
Numsgil:
Okay, this is really driving me nuts! I keep seeing different posibilities that make different methods work better than others.
Can anyone find a link on why some animals are omnivores and some specialize. I know generally why, but I don't understand the mechanics of it. If an herbivore finds a dead animal, why doesn't it eat it? Try to find resources for unicellular organisms, because on the macroscopic scale things like teeth make a huge difference.
I'll follow whatever resources we can find. Post the links.
PurpleYouko:
I still prefer all this stuff to be completely invisible to the robot and to the DNA.
I don't like the idea of having to actively produce specific enzymes as this implies that all robots are capable of making all of the available enzymes.
I like the system that Num suggested way back.
It uses a series of "bits" in a particular pattern to designate enzyme production systems that are on or off in a particular robot. If a bit is on then the robot can digest that kind of food, if not then it can't.
The bits can be set in the start of the DNA file just like custom variables for engineered bots but will mutate to different forms with successive generations.
Multiple bits set for a particular food type will double or triple specialize for greater efficiency but at the cost of losing other bits for different food types.
Using this system, existing robots (withouyt this bit pattern) will be automatically adjusted by the program. A fighting bot will become a specialized carnivore while any robot with the autotroph box checked will become a specialist veggie, able to take energy from waste (nitrates from the e-grid) and sunlight.
No DNA commands to store enzymes.
No genes to keep track of.
ALL behind the scenes and only effected by engineering design or mutation.
Simple, Easy to use, uncomplicated, Doesn't mess up old bots!
:D PY :D
shvarz:
Hmm, I did a bit of research in this question. Here are a couple of links to papers that deal with this stuff, but they are pretty tough for non-biologists:
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlere...bmedid=15289609
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlere...bmedid=15150419
Basically we were both correct. There seems to be two major hypothesis on how specialization develops, and there are cases supporting each of them.
Hypothesis one (Shvarz): Specialization through mutation accumulation. Organism can have as many genes as they want and improve them as much as they want, but those genes that are rarely used will accumulate bad mutations and disappear.
Hypothesis two (Nums and PY): Specialization through pleiotropic fitness costs. If organism gets better at doing something, this automatically leads to it being unable to do something else.
So, there is no clear answer. Both seem to be happening.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version