Code center > Darwinbots3

DB3 Questions

<< < (8/16) > >>

abyaly:
I have two gripes with this idea that aren't on your list:

1) In internet mode or in something like EricL's island sim, a bot may change environments and hence behave differently. The bot would be penalized for this.
2) A bot's behavior in non-critical situations can hamper it's ability to respond to critical ones.

An example of 2 would be a bot that runs from things that are bigger than it. If it becomes a big bertha for a while and then reproduces and loses the size advantage, the ability to run away well is lost for the original bot (and maybe even the offspring!). DB3 simply can't know beforehand what muscle distribution a bot will need to survive, so letting a bot make it's own informed guesses seems a lot more fair.

Houshalter:
Heres an idea. What if the bots can manually change there specializiation but also have the ability to adapt over time like what you mentioned. "100000 .adapt store" would let the bot adapt its muscles over the course of 100,000 cycles based on what it does and doesn't do. It would be a fair shortcut, not so arbitrary as just saying "you and your children will only be good at doing what you did over the last x cycles". For multibots or ant bots, the bots could choose what kind of muscles there children inhereted, not nessacarily there own.

Numsgil:

--- Quote from: abyaly ---I have two gripes with this idea that aren't on your list:

1) In internet mode or in something like EricL's island sim, a bot may change environments and hence behave differently. The bot would be penalized for this.
--- End quote ---

 I think that's like the caterpillar/butterfly analogy.  If you're in a new environment and want to dramatically change specializations, you need to go through some sort of transformation phase.
 
 
--- Quote ---2) A bot's behavior in non-critical situations can hamper it's ability to respond to critical ones.

An example of 2 would be a bot that runs from things that are bigger than it. If it becomes a big bertha for a while and then reproduces and loses the size advantage, the ability to run away well is lost for the original bot (and maybe even the offspring!). DB3 simply can't know beforehand what muscle distribution a bot will need to survive, so letting a bot make it's own informed guesses seems a lot more fair.
--- End quote ---

Specialization here is less to do with how strong of a force you can produce, and more to do with how much that force costs you.  So when you .5 up, it means you accelerate forward 5 units/cycle^2, and not that you spend 5 nrg to move forward.  So your specializations won't prevent you from doing actions that are uncharacteristic, it just means they'll be more expensive.
 

--- Quote from: Houshalter ---Heres an idea. What if the bots can manually change there specializiation but also have the ability to adapt over time like what you mentioned. "100000 .adapt store" would let the bot adapt its muscles over the course of 100,000 cycles based on what it does and doesn't do. It would be a fair shortcut, not so arbitrary as just saying "you and your children will only be good at doing what you did over the last x cycles". For multibots or ant bots, the bots could choose what kind of muscles there children inhereted, not nessacarily there own.
--- End quote ---

The running average I mentioned doesn't really cut off after 100000 cycles or anything like that.  Past signals are just slowly degraded towards zero as each new datum is recieved.  So values from indefinitely long ago still factor in, it's just a matter of how much.  The equation does have a value to tweak which controls how strongly weighted towards present activities the average is.  That could certainly be exposed to DNA.

Ant bots are another example of something like a somatic specialization.  I don't have a good plan for that just yet.

abyaly:

--- Quote from: Numsgil ---Specialization here is less to do with how strong of a force you can produce, and more to do with how much that force costs you.
--- End quote ---
My statements were based on this assumption. How much an action costs limits how much the bot can perform that action. It may be that accelerating at full tilt has become an almost suicidal idea due to energy constraints and atrophy. Especially in situations involving reproduction, where a bot suddenly has much less energy to play around with than it did before.

jknilinux:

--- Quote from: Numsgil ---Specialization will be more of the Lamarckian variety.  Ie: inheritable improvement through exercise.  Not quite biologically sound, but I think it'll make for the behavior we want.
--- End quote ---

Wait a sec, didn't someone else and I post a response to this? Was it deleted? Well, anyway, it just said I don't think that's a good idea.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page