Code center > Suggestions
Eventual improvements to DNA language
shvarz:
I don't agree with this theory at all. It can be argued in reverse too: If you have several genes linked together, then the whole system becomes unflexible to mutations, because any changes would affect multiple genes and lead to a less-fit bot. Whenever multiple function in organism are regulated by the same gene, that gene becomes much more restricted in its evolution, this is a well known fact. Some of the very important genes are essentially the same in yeast and in humans, because even small changes in them mess up everything.
I am not saying that this theory is better than your theory, I am just saying that the effect you are expecting is not obvious and you may actually get a reverse of what you are trying to achieve. It will all depend on what genes in question actually do, what kind of conditions they are using and so on. This is not a good enough reason to change DNA syntax, IMO.
I also don't buy this:
--- Quote ---That's fine if you don't care how the bot evolves, but if you're trying to watch it get more complex, you'll be disapointed.
--- End quote ---
and this:
--- Quote ---Mutations select against bad, instead of rewarding good.
--- End quote ---
I think you are simply wrong here. Evolution is obviously capable of creating complex organisms through small steps and improvements of individual parts. Also, removing bad and rewarding good are both important driving forces, you can't ignore either of these.
Numsgil:
--- Quote ---Whenever multiple function in organism are regulated by the same gene, that gene becomes much more restricted in its evolution, this is a well known fact. Some of the very important genes are essentially the same in yeast and in humans, because even small changes in them mess up everything.
--- End quote ---
Which is why the Nobel genes don't actually effect storing of values in the bots memeory (and hence the bot's actions) directly.
Noble genes instead effect the expression of a large number of other genes, with this control being forced on the genes in question.
In real organsims there are genes which control the expression of large numbers of other genes (ie: hormones). This control is forced on real genes in a very real sense, since the cells in question simply won't transcribe them if the hormones don't tell them to. If these genes mutate to run all the time, they still won't be able to because often times they just won't ever get transcribed in the first place.
The only way for them to escape the control of the hormones is by their regulators malfunctioning, which is outside thier realm of control. These regulators are sort of like Noble genes. There are many parallels at least.
That's the idea anyway.
shvarz:
Well-well-well, now we are going into the field that I actually understand :)
Hormones act in very different ways on cells. But they still act on a gene by gene basis. Here is just one common scenario: Say there is a hormone-sensing receptor in a cell, when it binds the hormone, it activates and goes into the nucleus, where it binds specific sites on the DNA and activates transcription of some genes. Each gene that is regulated by this hormone has this specific binding site. If this site is mutated, then hormone receptor would not bind and the gene will not get activated even when hormone is there.
So, it is possible for each individual gene to escape the regulation by the hormone individually. There is no general signal by which multiple genes are activated simultaneously.
There is an example of non-specific massive activation or inactivation of genes - that is remodeling of chromatin. Sometimes large sections of chromosomes are simply turned OFF or ON. But how this whole thing works, what role it plays and the reasons for that ... our knowledge is still very shaky on that. So, I would not try to model something that we don't understand in real life :)
Numsgil:
This is sort of what I'm talking about.
Also this from the same site.
--- Quote ---Given the complexity of multicellular eukaryotes, gene regulation in these organisms needs to be very complex.
--- End quote ---
Google "hierarchy of genes", and you'll hit quite a few sites. Real genes are hierarchial. One gene can control the expression of many others.
shvarz:
--- Quote ---One gene can control the expression of many others.
--- End quote ---
So can genes in DBs already.
Gene 1 can check on a condition "x.mood 1 =" and write 1 in a mem.loc. N. All downstream genes simply have to check the value in that mem.loc. N in their conditions.
This is actually a better (more realistic) model for real gene hierarchy than the Noble genes.
I am going home know, I'll read the links later.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version