Code center > Suggestions

Emergent Systems

<< < (11/23) > >>

Numsgil:

--- Quote ---Please say that somebody understands my point here  :(
--- End quote ---
:raises hand: I do.

Which is why I've been saying that it's really just an argument over what level of abstraction you want.  I prefer to keep the abstractio just below the level of useful behavior, because it's easier to maintain in code.

Below that I don't much care.  I don't care how the bot moves, but why it decided to move now and not later.  I'm more interested in behavioral evolution than phsyiological evolution.

Ulciscor:
Aha! I see! :D Well I agree that there are rules imposed when a command is linked to an action, but I don't think you can get around that. Although...

Maybe the command would make the organism attempt to undertake the action. Like (for arguement's sake) .up translated to a bot attempting to fire particles to move forwards. The bot would then try to do so. Whether it would succeed would depend on the factors of the environment, which would vary on the situation and would never be rigid or imposed.

I am thinking of analogies in biology. And I'm starting to think DNA is not the best way of describing bot script any more. 'Neural pathways' seem to be much more accurate, since sensory inputs or prompts are linked to some sort of output.

PurpleYouko:

--- Quote ---I'm not understanding the modus operandi of the DNA to the world.  Explain it to me in terms of the current system.

Currently, DNA manipulates packets of information (memory cells) into other packets of information (sysvar commands).

Are we still doign that or comming from a new direction?
--- End quote ---
I am thinking along parralell lines to DB. We have to have some kind of register system like the DB memlocs otherwise no variability of commands is possible.

ie. command A could tell the organism to turn left but without some way to specify how far left it would do exactly tehsame thing every time the command was used. That would just make the DNA less flexible.

However I want to get away from the reverse polish notation stuff.

I envision each command to be simply a string of bits (possibly varying length) that contains a whole bunch of instructions that will be either carried out or not depending on whether a previous command has enabled or disabled it.

Certain instructions could (for example say) skip next command IF condition X. But all instructions in the current command would be carried out.

I haven't really fleshed out my entire idea yet, not even fully in my own mind.

PurpleYouko:

--- Quote ---I am thinking of analogies in biology. And I'm starting to think DNA is not the best way of describing bot script any more. 'Neural pathways' seem to be much more accurate, since sensory inputs or prompts are linked to some sort of output.
--- End quote ---

I was thinking that too.

The present DB DNA is more like a behavioural program than true DNA. It is more what the bot is thinking than what is going on in the real metabolic pathways. There is some crossover though.

Maybe we should have two parallel programs, one for behaviour (the brain) and the other for metabolism and stuff.

Ulciscor:
Totally agreed! I have recently been thinking that too.

The genetic stuff could handle metabolism, reproduction, and could have effects on the behavioural aspect.

The neural stuff could handle senses and actions, and could have effects on the genetic aspect.

Then there is the actual physical bot that could attempt to 'obey' the other 2 aspects, whilst also affecting them both.


Does this make any sense or is it needlessly complex? I'm fairly sure it would take an eternity to compute for each bot.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page