Author Topic: Simoltaneous DNA execution  (Read 13203 times)

Offline Numsgil

  • Administrator
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 7742
    • View Profile
Simoltaneous DNA execution
« Reply #15 on: March 11, 2005, 09:02:46 PM »
Backward compatible.

Note that the definition uses 'can read old files'.  Having older versions of bots and newer versions of bots interact works only if they don't interphere with the way the other works, and doesn't actually effect the backward compatible nature of the program.

That said, allowing a checkbox for each individual species in the startup options screen would work.  So you could run one species with linear DNA, and another without.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2005, 09:03:14 PM by Numsgil »

Offline Botsareus

  • Society makes it all backwards - there is a good reason for that
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4483
    • View Profile
Simoltaneous DNA execution
« Reply #16 on: March 11, 2005, 09:21:45 PM »
If we have some robots on the screen with liner execution and nonliner in the same time, then there is no fear balance in the simulation. For example one will mutate easyer then the other one.

I posted my own solution to this problem already.

P.S.
I say we use my own definition of backwords compatible or forget about this new dna system. wana wote?

Btw+p.s. of p.s.

I think my definition is the correct definition , your link does not go agenst my definition in any way.

Offline Numsgil

  • Administrator
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 7742
    • View Profile
Simoltaneous DNA execution
« Reply #17 on: March 11, 2005, 09:43:55 PM »
Your definition is a subset of my definition.

That is, to use logic, your definition implies my definition, but the opposite is not true.  That is, my definition does not imply your definition.

AND WHAT THE HECK DO YOU MEAN WHEN YOU SAY 'FEAR'.  Seriously, I don't think you're using the right word.

Fear.

Last, for this to work at all the DNA for a bot has to be either ALL linear or ALL non linear.  Any mixing of the two defeats the purpose entirely.  The purpose is to 'free' the genes from the direct influence of each other.

Offline Botsareus

  • Society makes it all backwards - there is a good reason for that
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4483
    • View Profile
Simoltaneous DNA execution
« Reply #18 on: March 11, 2005, 09:52:57 PM »
lol Num,  :banghead: Fair = fear back to the Twilight zone (cant spell)

I  MEAN [you]FAIR [/you] NUM
« Last Edit: March 11, 2005, 09:55:16 PM by Botsareus »

Offline Numsgil

  • Administrator
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 7742
    • View Profile
Simoltaneous DNA execution
« Reply #19 on: March 11, 2005, 09:57:15 PM »
OOhhhhhh....

Makes sense now.

Offline Numsgil

  • Administrator
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 7742
    • View Profile
Simoltaneous DNA execution
« Reply #20 on: March 11, 2005, 10:05:02 PM »
Old bots would still run (most of them don't use any kind of intergene communication anyway.  Well, most of the nontop bots and non mutated anyway).

If anything this would make the math easier to understand.  The stack would be isolated to each gene, things like:

cond
start
6
stop

cond
6 !=
start
blah blah...
stop

won't work anymore.

I honestly don't understand your passive aggressiveness.

Offline Botsareus

  • Society makes it all backwards - there is a good reason for that
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4483
    • View Profile
Simoltaneous DNA execution
« Reply #21 on: March 11, 2005, 10:08:54 PM »
"If anything this would make the math easier to understand. " IF you say so Num, ok I am cool.

Offline Botsareus

  • Society makes it all backwards - there is a good reason for that
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4483
    • View Profile
Simoltaneous DNA execution
« Reply #22 on: March 11, 2005, 10:13:39 PM »
How about we write some kind of "Dna Converter" to make top bots and mutated bots work under your system? (The tricky thing is under the new costs they should lose as mutch energy as under the old costs.)

P.S.
I am not being agresive Num , chill...

Offline Numsgil

  • Administrator
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 7742
    • View Profile
Simoltaneous DNA execution
« Reply #23 on: March 11, 2005, 10:22:18 PM »
That's what the 'use linear DNA' button would do, allow older bots to work in the new simulation.  Are we speaking the same language here?  I feel that we're not communicating effectively.

Comments like:
[quonte]
The heck with all the current robots

The heck with simple to understand ,math like, dna processing.
[/quote]
are passive aggressive.

Offline Botsareus

  • Society makes it all backwards - there is a good reason for that
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4483
    • View Profile
Simoltaneous DNA execution
« Reply #24 on: March 11, 2005, 10:28:19 PM »
No more comments :D

If we simply add a button: then the robots wont mutate correctly together. You expect to keep the old mutation system and the new mutation system? What If I am trying to mutate a robot to switch from using liner dna, into using nonliner dna, How would I do that?

Offline Numsgil

  • Administrator
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 7742
    • View Profile
Simoltaneous DNA execution
« Reply #25 on: March 11, 2005, 10:47:56 PM »
Manually.  The two systems just don't mesh.  And anyway, the promise of more interesting mutations and natural development lies along this path, so why would you want to mutate old top bots and mutated bots anyway when you can get more interesting results elsewhere.

Offline shvarz

  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 1341
    • View Profile
Simoltaneous DNA execution
« Reply #26 on: March 12, 2005, 01:21:35 AM »
Cool idea.  Here are ways to solve some of the problems mentioned:
1. Chromosomes should be defined by DNA commands.

chromostart
blah-blah
chromoend

Within a single chromosome the stack is used as before - allows inter-gene communication.  Each new chromosome resets the stack.  To make your old files run in new version, simply add chromostart in the beginning and chromoend at the end - most of the bots should be just fine this way.

2. Allow single-chromosome genomes.  After all, not all genomes are diploid.  Poliploidy is not necessary, it does not add much anyway.

3. All pairing up that is needed is just to place paired chromosomes one after another.  During sexual reproduction, take odd chromosomes from mother, even from father (just like sexrepro works now).  This actually makes tetraploidy possible (or any other even-number-ploidies).

Comment:
Nums, organisms don't go through meiosis just because it is faster :)  There are always better reasons :)  But we can make meiosis possible, should not be hard.
"Never underestimate the power of stupid things in big numbers" - Serious Sam

Offline Numsgil

  • Administrator
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 7742
    • View Profile
Simoltaneous DNA execution
« Reply #27 on: March 12, 2005, 01:53:09 AM »
We could allow stack manipulations to pass along the same chromosome I guess...  but the store commands would have to be at the same time.

Ideally the program wouldn't have a 'diploid mechanism', it'd just set up the basic mechanisms that allowed it to develop in the first eukaryotes.  I think a 'double strand DNA break' mutation would prompt this kind of action (that's why real organisms became diploid).  So single strand chromosomes are really the default.

How do we know which chromosomes to associate with one another though?  How do real cells know which chromosomes to stick together during mitosis?  I've heard some plant species can interbeed with others, then double their chromosome number to become a proper diploid creature.  Something like that should be possible too, I think.

Basically, I think we should have sub commands, like crossing over and chromosome reproduction that can be macroed with a simple meiosis command.

I read that thing about meiosis being faster somewhere on the internet.  After looking it up it's actually much slower since their are 4 cells at the end instead of 2.  Shows you that you can't always trust info online.

Offline shvarz

  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 1341
    • View Profile
Simoltaneous DNA execution
« Reply #28 on: March 12, 2005, 02:12:51 AM »
The chromosomes are linked in pairs.  Same will be here.  Just like this:
1a
1b
2a
2b
3a
3b

and so on.  If the order gets mixed up - the off-spring will also get severely mixed up and die.

Quote
So single strand chromosomes are really the default.

What do you mean?

Quote
I've heard some plant species can interbeed with others, then double their chromosome number to become a proper diploid creature. Something like that should be possible too, I think.

It is possble, but not that important.  Don't bother.

Quote
Basically, I think we should have sub commands, like crossing over and chromosome reproduction that can be macroed with a simple meiosis command.

You mean actual commands for cross-over?  That would say "crossover here"?  But cross-overs are random.  Anyway, recombination is a whole other matter.  Simple re-assortment of mother's and father's chromosomes will add a lot of power already.
« Last Edit: March 12, 2005, 02:14:34 AM by shvarz »
"Never underestimate the power of stupid things in big numbers" - Serious Sam

Offline Numsgil

  • Administrator
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 7742
    • View Profile
Simoltaneous DNA execution
« Reply #29 on: March 12, 2005, 03:17:19 AM »
Here's what I'd like to see.

Imagine a system where a single chromosome bot learns to associate two identical copies of the same chromosome together to fix DNA damage, or split up chromsomes randomly, or whatever.  Maybe two haploid identical copies of a cell combine to form a diploid individual.

If we have the right rules in place, we should see things like sexual reproduction and diploid-ness arise naturally.

That's what I'm talking about.  Then chromosomes learn for themselves how to associate similar chromosomes together.  As long as we can figure out some kind of mechanism for them to use, we're set.

Unfortunately, the process that real chromosomes use is somewhat epigenetic, which probably wouldn't work well.  Any ideas?

And recombination is only a part of the advantage of meiotic reproduction.    Crossing over helps keep chromsomes more or less consistant with one another.  It wouldn't be alot of extra work to figure it out.