Some suggestions after a long long time...

[k0zm0]

Hi everybody... It's been a long time since I last visited this page...


First suggestion

I'm not too fond of the code as it is... The mutation is random, it piratically isn't  beneficial to anyone...
The point we had survived so far is that DNA has a safeguard... I'm talking about chromosome pairs...
If one of the chromosome pair fails to do it's job, we have a "backup". So what I'm suggesting is a dual code system... This dual code system could also be used as a sexual reproduction system...

Example:

Current system:
   We have a 3 gene code in our bot. Like... A B C. Let us say that it work perfectly. The mutation then damages the B gene. Then : A B* C. Our robot no longer functions.

Dual code system:

We have a 3 gene code in our bot. Like... A B C & A B C. The mutation damages the B gene...
Then: A B* C & A B C. Our bot can still function because the robot can execute the code...

Also we have sexual reproduction. When it reproduces, Robot 1 donates 1 half of the code A B* C & A B C.
Robot 2 donates 1 half of the code A B* C & A B C.

Now we have possible combinations: ABC&ABC , AB*C&ABC, ABC&AB*C and AB*C&AB*C

75% of the descendants work normally ,  25% of the descendants have only the mutation gene...

The problem is choosing what gene to run... How can a bot know if it's running OK?
One way is to mark the gene that has mutated. The normal gene could run normally, the mutated one is blocked. But when we have this situation:AB*C&AB*C, markers would go away and we would get completely new organism, because we have all mutated genes... All it has to do is survive and reproduce...

How can a bot know which bot is it's own species?
Hash could be calculated from the "good" genes and could use it to recognize a potential mate. Mutated genes are excluded from the calculation.

The real problem it that this is an eukaryote model not prokaryote model (bacteria)...
But as mentioned many times before... Darwinbots have nothing to do with real world life...

Second suggestion

What happened to the material? Calcium, Silicate,...? Bots could build walls from that kind of material, could gather it to incorporate it into shell... Nutrients could be used by vegs and bots as an essential material for life... Oxygen and carbon dioxide could be used in darwinbot universe to convert energy to mater and vise versa.

The complexity would be beneficial and make the system more stable...


Conclusion  

I'm no programmer... If I could be, I would make my own version...

[Testlund]

I'm not too fond of the code as it is... The mutation is random, it piratically isn't beneficial to anyone...

Are you saying that mutations aren't random in nature, that some dna can't get mutated? Have you tried running an evosim with zerobots?

Several things you mension here has been discussed, but I don't think the programmers have decided yet how to implement it.

Darwinbots have nothing to do with real world life...

It simulates it better than any other a-life program I've come across. If you know of a better program I would be happy to try it.  

[Peter]

I second that(yes, both points)

Most mutations in nature are random, (atleast the ones the creature doesn't want it to have)
There are some kind of bacteria that mutate themself on some places in the dna if they can't survive in the current enviroment. But the bacteria that can do that are rare and do it seldom becouse it will probably kill them.
There are always exeptions on a rule. But the way darwinbots does it is pretty nature-true.

And no, it is correct darwinbots isn't as in real live.
And that is becouse we don't exactly know how it works in real life, atleast it is complicated enough. We know something but not everything about dna.

Well there has been though of this point yes, just search for chromosomes or sexual reproduction.
Why there hasn't been something inplented.
One of the following

They haven't found a right way to inplement it.

Maybe they decided it is good enough right it is now.

Would have too much work/too hard to do.

Maybe it isn't going to be in the VB-version 2.xx, but in the C# version 3.xx


I don't know, could be any reason.

Are you saying that mutations aren't random in nature, that some dna can't get mutated? Have you tried running an evosim with zerobots?

You aren't really reacting on me but...
Well I have run some zerosims, I never really founded anything special inside it.
What are your foundings with zerosims.

[Testlund]

Well I have run some zerosims, I never really founded anything special inside it.
What are your foundings with zerosims.

I have seen some pretty complex behavior. Sometimes they appear to be more alive compared to designed bots, but you may need to run it for quite some time before seeing anything. Also designed bots tend to just break with mutations as the above poster mensions, but not with zerobots. Zerobots can only get better. I posted some really interesting resault a few months ago but I don't know if anyone saw what I saw. Here:

http://www.darwinbots.com/Forum/index.php?showtopic=2051

Somebody with better understanding of the DNA may tell me what caused the behavior. Unfortunately it died out and didn't appear again. What I've seen with my chainbot is that sometimes it just decides to produce it's offspring so it builds a chain a bit across the screen, and other bots line up under it to form new chains, then the behavior just goes away.

[shvarz]

Yep, I agree with Testlund and Peter. Besides, your starting assumption that

The point we had survived so far is that DNA has a safeguard... I'm talking about chromosome pairs...

is just plain incorrect. Majority of life on earth (if you count individuals) don't have pairs of chromosomes - they have a single chromosome and they have been very successful in surviving for millions and millions of years.

[Peter]

Well I have run some zerosims, I never really founded anything special inside it.
What are your foundings with zerosims.

I have seen some pretty complex behavior. Sometimes they appear to be more alive compared to designed bots, but you may need to run it for quite some time before seeing anything. Also designed bots tend to just break with mutations as the above poster mensions, but not with zerobots. Zerobots can only get better. I posted some really interesting resault a few months ago but I don't know if anyone saw what I saw. Here:

http://www.darwinbots.com/Forum/index.php?showtopic=2051

Somebody with better understanding of the DNA may tell me what caused the behavior. Unfortunately it died out and didn't appear again. What I've seen with my chainbot is that sometimes it just decides to produce it's offspring so it builds a chain a bit across the screen, and other bots line up under it to form new chains, then the behavior just goes away.

Ok, it could be becouse I never let the sims get serious long. My bots never came further then reproduction and some movement(and that is for me an accomplisment)
I have seen your sim some time ago and have seen the same effects.
I don't think anybody can easily deciver what the dna is doing. It gets complicated with all the calculations and stuff.

Yep, I agree with Testlund and Peter. Besides, your starting assumption that

The point we had survived so far is that DNA has a safeguard... I'm talking about chromosome pairs...

is just plain incorrect. Majority of life on earth (if you count individuals) don't have pairs of chromosomes - they have a single chromosome and they have been very successful in surviving for millions and millions of years.

Ok, I am not a expert as you are. But I think everything has a reason, maybe becouse we are more complicated multiceluar creatures we need those chromosomes as a kind of safeguard. As a mutation can break more.
Why do we have double chromosomes, do you know the answer.

In fact isn't it a fact that 'normal' dna has 2 sides as in conections between A(Adenine) and T(Thymine), C(Cytosine) and G(Guanine). And the dna is repairing it sometimes if damaged.

So don't simple creatures like it don't always have a saveguard. Why don't we in darwinbots.

[k0zm0]

QUOTE
The point we had survived so far is that DNA has a safeguard... I'm talking about chromosome pairs...
is just plain incorrect. Majority of life on earth (if you count individuals) don't have pairs of chromosomes - they have a single chromosome and they have been very successful in surviving for millions and millions of years.

Well, when I was talking about "we", I was referring to humans...  Like I know nothing about other forms of life. I study pharmacy, you know... I most cases bacteria is our main target. To defeat the enemy, you must know the enemy.  What I'm saying here is to make a safeguard for mutations. Single strand of DNA if fine (in current DB), but mutation can quickly corrupt the code... In nature we're talking about chemical and/or physical interactions, here we can only talk about virtual... Beneficial mutation can't occur in virutal simulation due to difference in code structure...

So we'll have to limit it somehow... That was the whole point of proposing that. Possibility of sexual reproduction is only a side effect...

[Numsgil]

A quick point I'd like to make: real organisms have an actual mutation rate which is #errors in DNA - #corrections in DNA.  You could take the stance that the mutation rates in Darwinbots represent the actual mutation rates-- that the bots have already managed to correct hundreds or thousands of mutations that we never see.

[Peter]

A quick point I'd like to make: real organisms have an actual mutation rate which is #errors in DNA - #corrections in DNA.  You could take the stance that the mutation rates in Darwinbots represent the actual mutation rates-- that the bots have already managed to correct hundreds or thousands of mutations that we never see.

Well, looks pretty much like the point I've tried to make in a earlier post. I don't think a repair something would be good, it sucks speed(atleast some) and you get random mutations repaired, also the good ones, in nature repairing is needed to stop mutations from occuring too much(and there is really some effort in), here we get sit in our chair set the slider for mutations some lower and have less mutations.

Well, when I was talking about "we", I was referring to humans...  Like I know nothing about other forms of life. I study pharmacy, you know... I most cases bacteria is our main target. To defeat the enemy, you must know the enemy.

Wow, when did DB get as swart as a bacteria, unbelieveble. I thought we where evolving little circles.  
And pharmacy, meds is there much dna involved.
I am doing chemical laboratory technology, all I know about dna is how to break it appart and measure what is left, that is harder then it sounds you know  .

What I'm saying here is to make a safeguard for mutations. Single strand of DNA if fine (in current DB), but mutation can quickly corrupt the code... In nature we're talking about chemical and/or physical interactions, here we can only talk about virtual... Beneficial mutation can't occur in virutal simulation due to difference in code structure...

So we'll have to limit it somehow... That was the whole point of proposing that. Possibility of sexual reproduction is only a side effect...

Well why can't benificial mutatation occur  .
Eh, you can limit it with a slider  .