Author Topic: NO MORE OVERFLOW  (Read 12573 times)

Offline Numsgil

  • Administrator
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 7742
    • View Profile
NO MORE OVERFLOW
« Reply #15 on: April 11, 2005, 06:07:56 PM »
No Bots, they're both mutating.  But one is mutating his rates of mutation and the other isn't.
« Last Edit: April 11, 2005, 06:08:06 PM by Numsgil »

Offline Botsareus

  • Society makes it all backwards - there is a good reason for that
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4483
    • View Profile
NO MORE OVERFLOW
« Reply #16 on: April 11, 2005, 06:09:47 PM »
Interesting, I will try it.

Offline Botsareus

  • Society makes it all backwards - there is a good reason for that
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4483
    • View Profile
NO MORE OVERFLOW
« Reply #17 on: April 11, 2005, 06:19:21 PM »
NO NUM, THE ROBOT WITH THE RATES CHANGING WINS! AND THIS IS IN THE "NOT WORKING" VIRSION WITCH IS THE DOWNLOAD FROM THE NEW FTP DB 2.36.2 WITCH PY DID NOT FIX YET.

Offline Numsgil

  • Administrator
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 7742
    • View Profile
NO MORE OVERFLOW
« Reply #18 on: April 11, 2005, 06:29:43 PM »
Bots, I told you you have to do it more than once.  Two identical copies of the same bot will eventually battle each other until only one is left.  Set up a statistical experiment where the winner has to have won half(number of rounds) + sqr(number of rounds).

Offline Carlo

  • Bot Destroyer
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
    • View Profile
NO MORE OVERFLOW
« Reply #19 on: April 11, 2005, 06:34:49 PM »
Quote
For example if I run my killer multibot Dimacheri with mutations it will definatly lose against a non mutating version ...

I think this happens because fighter bots are designed to be perfectly fit in their own environment, and also because they have no redundancies, etc. You should take for the try some evolved bots with all their "junk dna", as it was c. circumgirans.

Anyway, why doesn't anybody take care of all these tries - also those suggested by numsgil-? It would be extremely interesting to make a serious study, with all the numbers, graphs, etc., from the biological point of view. Shvarz, are you reading this? What do you think about it, a statistical study of the (possible) advantage given to a species by a mutation rate in an alife sim?

Quote
Although one of Carlos points gave me an idea. The arena in DB pretty much stays the same so mutations aren't needed as much to adapt to new climates.

Hmmm... and what about a programmable change of environment, say: "in the next 10 million cycles, slightly change friction (or costs, or whatever else) from <startvalue> to <endvalue>". They you go to sleep, and the morning after...

Offline Botsareus

  • Society makes it all backwards - there is a good reason for that
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4483
    • View Profile
NO MORE OVERFLOW
« Reply #20 on: April 11, 2005, 06:58:48 PM »
I did it more then once , the difference is very little but my first bot with mutating rates does better.

Offline shvarz

  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 1341
    • View Profile
NO MORE OVERFLOW
« Reply #21 on: April 11, 2005, 11:42:51 PM »
Yes, I am reading this.  But it is not an easy question, it will depend on many things and needs some serios statistical analysis and so on.  BTW, the way graphs are working now, it is impossible to see any long-term trends.

  Right now I am evolving a bot that can hunt for moving low-anundance food in sims with high friction.  I am over 25 million cycles now and beleive me that the evolved bots are much better than the one I started with.  I actually tried to put them against each other and the parent gets its brains knocked out.

I don't know for sure, cause Bots does not give details on his sims, but my impression is that he sets mutation rate too high.  The result is that he gets two effects combined: "Mueller's ratchet" and "error catastrophie" - both lead to decrease in fitness over time and the "mutating bot" will lose.
"Never underestimate the power of stupid things in big numbers" - Serious Sam

Offline Numsgil

  • Administrator
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 7742
    • View Profile
NO MORE OVERFLOW
« Reply #22 on: April 12, 2005, 12:12:56 AM »
Hey Schvarz, since you're our resident mutation expert (seeing as how you run them longer then most others) you should write up a short article on what settings to use, what you should expect to see, how to sort through the bots you get, etc.  Would be really interesting.

Also, what is Mueller's ratchet and error catastrophe?  I think I understand what you mean but I'd be interested in finding out for sure.

Offline AZPaul

  • Bot Builder
  • **
  • Posts: 76
    • View Profile
NO MORE OVERFLOW
« Reply #23 on: April 12, 2005, 04:31:23 AM »
Mueller's ratchet. Ahh, yes. Within most asexually reproducing species the buildup of diliterious genes will, eventually crash the population, even to extinction. Some corollaries in small inbred sexual populations as well...like Arkansas.

May I make one observation? Picky, I know, but do let's keep things straight.

"Evolution" does not happen to individuals. It happens to populations. It is the basis of speciel events and an individual does not constitute a species. Populations do. Individuals suffer mutations which add (maybe) to genetic variation within the population which leads to adaption (maybe) to changing environments. No individual evolves.  

Mutations may or may not be in the "individuals" best interest. Mutations are random events that have whatever effect they have and the individual suffers or prospers accordingly.

Mutations [you]are[/you] in the best interests of the "population." Individuals with dilitarious mutations (usually) do not survive to reproduce, thus, for a population over many generations, survived mutations add considerable genetic variation to the gene pool.

When the inevitable environmental change occurs, the more genetically varied the population the better the chance that some combination of available alleles (ex-mutations now ubiquitous within the population) will produce individuals better able to cope (fitter) in the changing environment. Or maybe not.

As for Bot's desire for a faster rate of mutation rates:

Keep in mind that in a simulator like DB the mutation rate, and the rate of mutation rates, is synonymous with overall evolutionary time. One way to simulate great lengths of time is to have a high rate of mutations and a high rate of change in those rates. The other side of the simulation, to make this time scale accurate, must be a very short individual life span.  

Since beneficial mutations, and allele variability, are slow to work through even a subset of a population, the higher the mutation rate the higher the generation "turnover" must be to weed out the bad (but lucky, since it may have been, by fluke, passed on to one generation) mutation and make the good alleles more frequent in the population.

In the absence of this, Shvarz has got it right. Not enough generations for natural selection to work, you end up with bad genes everywhere, very quickly. Back to brother Mueller and his silver ratchet. Or was that Maxwell and his silver hammer? Can't remember.

Offline Numsgil

  • Administrator
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 7742
    • View Profile
NO MORE OVERFLOW
« Reply #24 on: April 12, 2005, 05:58:15 AM »
Ah, see they don't teach this kind of thing in Bio 101.  I always knew we were playing with very specific cases with mutations.

One thing Paul, what do you mean by generational turnover?  I agree that speeding up mutations means that you need a way to speed up the removal of deleterious mutations from the population.

Offline Botsareus

  • Society makes it all backwards - there is a good reason for that
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4483
    • View Profile
NO MORE OVERFLOW
« Reply #25 on: April 12, 2005, 11:29:00 AM »
Quote
"mutating bot" will lose. ?????

No Shvartz , I am saying "mutating bot" will win , win win ;.....

Offline Light

  • Bot Destroyer
  • ***
  • Posts: 245
    • View Profile
NO MORE OVERFLOW
« Reply #26 on: April 12, 2005, 11:38:13 AM »
Isn't generational turnover the average time it takes for one generation to die and another to take over, so for humans it would be like 70  or basically the lifespan of a bot. A high turnover would be a bot with a short lifespan

Offline shvarz

  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 1341
    • View Profile
NO MORE OVERFLOW
« Reply #27 on: April 12, 2005, 11:55:15 AM »
Quote
No Shvartz , I am saying "mutating bot" will win , win win ;....


Then what is your problem then?  I don't get it...  If it works already, then why do you want to change something?  :)

Seriosly though, you are saying that bot that changes  mutation rates wins in your competition against a bot that does not change the mutation rates, right? And they both have mutation rates set by you...

I am saying that mutation rates that you set is probably too high, leading to accumulation of bad mutations.  So when a bot can change it's mutation rates, then it will select for bots with lower mutation rates, become more stable and win.  This is just a guess.  I would be able to tell you more if you gave more details.  A good test would be to take the bot that wins the competition and put it against the parental bots with mutations completely disabled.  If it loses or is even with parent, then I am right.  If it wins over the parent, then I am wrong and something else is going on.
"Never underestimate the power of stupid things in big numbers" - Serious Sam

Offline Botsareus

  • Society makes it all backwards - there is a good reason for that
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4483
    • View Profile
NO MORE OVERFLOW
« Reply #28 on: April 12, 2005, 12:00:08 PM »
I just had this funny feeling... that changing the way 'mutation of mutation rates' works will make it even better, .... but I have my own Visual Basic for that.... I leave you guys alone, I need to test it myself first.


and sry for that c***BEEEP*****p yesturday, You alll....

Offline Numsgil

  • Administrator
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 7742
    • View Profile
NO MORE OVERFLOW
« Reply #29 on: April 12, 2005, 05:56:37 PM »
I would just like to take this opportunity to say that if you're going to swear, by all means swear.  As long as you don't make it a habit, I don't mind.

What I do mind is ****beep*****.  Drives me crazy.  Just swear.