Darwinbots Forum
General => Off Topic => Topic started by: Botsareus on March 07, 2005, 11:04:56 AM
-
:D
Good Job with that. I am staying tuned until all the bugs are fixed (or at least most of the bugs)
***
Just came up with a new way to mutate bots , testing...
***
I am stuck on the music but it's ok. I'll eventually figure out what to do.
***
Did anyone give music already? <---------------------------------
Num do you know the api (probably yes bc its the same for c++) to play a sound file using VB? (although I dont think sndplaysound supports .mp3's)
So Num the basic qustion is: Do you know how to make DarwinBots play sound?
***
O yea :devil: I am working on a new bot called "lessbeef".
The idea: it will study the map first before it attacks, then go to an area where fewer enemies are and feed and reproduce. (I dont know if it should have more energy or more numbers , anyway) After the group feels strong they leave one or two behind so the whole population won't die out while the rest go storm the enemy. It will no longer concintrate on feeding.
It will study the map first before it attacks, then go where there is the most enemy bots, attacking them all as a group.
So they layout is:
studymap ---> eat/reproduce ----> attack ---> studymap...
For Defence:
See if the attackers are strong or weak
Strong= Run away to a safer area. (Based on the map data gathered before)
Weak= Stop eating and wipe them out.
"Lessbeef" means it will get rid of the enemy in one move, hehehehe
If anyone wants to beat me to it, go ahead , just please keep the name.
Ex:
"Lessbeef By Endy"
"Lessbeef By Henk"
etc.
P.S.
One problem here is giving map data from one bot to the other.
The idea is children will keep the memory data of the parent.
-
Don't get me wrong. We're not even at 3.0.0 yet. But I don't think it's fair for only me and PY to have a new version of it to play with since it's taking so long.
I know how to play music files. I've already done it in another project I was working on. Took a while to figure out, but it's easy once you know how. It plays through a windows media player plug-in I think, so you'll need it on your computer for it to work. Most windows installations have it anyway, so it shouldn't matter too much.
I'm not sure how you're going to store the map location of enemy bots. However, pack behavior wouldn't be a bad idea if you can get it to work. I was thinking of ways to use the refvel functions to create a school of fish, so each bot can warn all the other bots about predators and they can move away as one.
-
sounds pretty sweat to me. good luck, im working on a bot 2, sadly I have some major *BEEP*ing problems
-
Shvarz came up with a swimming pack alga a while back. It used *.refaim and .setaim to make each robot turn to face the direction that the one in front was going.
Worked pretty well.
:D PY :D
-
I made all Din's run away from any multi bot with three ties at one point. Not exactly the same thing but did produce a sort of wave effect as each fled from Helios. Maybe something warning of enemys spoted with in/out would be best, or better yet use memloc to scan a select memory location.
Endy B)
-
I think trying to create a sort of map is impractical and wouldn't work in reality, but some sort of group bot behaviour would be an interesting area to investigate not sure how much of an impact it would have on improving bots in the league though.
-
practicality aside, a group hunting behavior would allow smaller bots to take down larger bots.
Could help shore up the sudden increase in heavy bodied top bots.
-
Ok I finsihed my experiment trying to evlove bots using 2.35db , I pinned a nonmutating bot agenst a mutating virsion of itself:
cond
*.nrg 20000 >
start
50 .repro store
stop
cond
start
-1 .shoot store
10 .up store
stop
end
^ that is fomiliar to you guys I post that BEEEEP* a lot. , the above was used as starting Dna.
Results did not make sense:
If bouth robots were givin the same starting values: the one that did not mutate won
If robots with mutation was givin high papulation in the Beginning: It won but the only thing different was the mutation rates.
Conclusion:
The Dna system and mutation is still too limited to produce working and unique code.
Based on that ^ now I will try robots that have many many generations on one repro, the idea is that enough changes in the dna will acumilate in one go , to produce some kind of new better robots.
-
There are some flaws in your experiment:
1. Time. 90% (99%? Maybe 99.99%) of mutations are BAD. Or at best have no effect. So it will take alot of time for a mutation sim to produce something interesting.
Try letting it run for 3 days straight.
2. Conditions - You are trying to judge how well a bot evolved based on how well it fairs against another bot in F1 starting conditions. But the bot didn't evolve to win under F1 conditions, it evolved to survive in its current settings.
After 30 000 cycles the energy levels are going to be different than they are at the start of a standard F1 match.
Basically, you'll end up with a bot that is designed to survive in F1 conditions after 30 000 cycles. So if it doesn't do as well as an unmutated version in F1 conditions at 0 cycles, don't be so surprised.
Try adding some unmated version to the mutation sim. See which one fairs better on the mutated one's home turf.
-
"Try letting it run for 3 days straight." ROFL , no really man , I did simulators before; my simulators produce resolts a lot faster... , I am working on a sim right now (not really - I am fead up with vb right now) anyway, when I get that sim finished I'll give you the source code. (unless it does not work witch I dought)
-
2. Conditions - You are trying to judge how well a bot evolved based on how well it fairs against another bot in F1 starting conditions. But the bot didn't evolve to win under F1 conditions, it evolved to survive in its current settings.
I did F1 conditions as the settings so no problem there.
-
Try adding some unmated version to the mutation sim. See which one fairs better on the mutated one's home turf.
The problem (as I already explained it) is that the robot does not mutate new stuff at all, I pinned it agenst a nonmutating or "unmated" virsion for the whole sim, the robot did not evolve and the nonmutating virsion always won if the robots were [you]given the same starting values[/you].
If you mean "not reproducteble virsion of the bot" by "unmated". Then what does the robot have to evolve agenst if the chance of it surviving is practicaly Infinitely greater then chance of robot that does nor reproduce surviving.
-
Light , its quite practical to make a robot build a map of its surroundings, I seen it done.
Check out (sorry dont have link) stuff about a compatition in the desert , robot controlled cars have to figure out the best path trough the desert using only gps and good old vedio or lasor sensors.
Instead of building information on each robot, It will build "square blobs of stuff" in memory and how mutch different robots are in each blob.
Note: I did not say "round blobs" because that will requre the use of sin and cos and maybe atn and tan, the dna code does not have this stuff, infact yes: making "round blobs of stuff" will be inpractical. (I mean we only have about 800 free memory locations to work with)
-
Myabe its possible but in a fight it would take to long most battles dont last that long and robots have a relatively short life span, if each robot maps its own area, it then has too share it with other bots, and given that a bot can cross the screen in like 25 cycles, it wont be accurate at all, only use you could do is maybe map enemy bot concentrations in different parts of the screens, but I dont really see what use that information could serve your bots, plus the whole idea is a massive undertaking for what I see as no gain, but if you can get it to work, fair play to you.
I think its much more interesting having bots maybe group together at a particular location or just keeping close too one another for protection in numbers, this might work quite well against single bots, if helios charged straight through one of the groups it could possibly mo them all down, who knows. Another interesting thing is just having bots assesing there target, for example are they bigger than me should I keep away like DIN with Helios, or should we team up to take big bots down, should I build up or reproduce fast, what is the best strategy to defeat my enemy. Having a bit of comunication between bots too co-ordinate information. If I wasn't snowed under with work I would maybe do some more work on my bots, but such is life that wont be for a while :(
-
only use you could do is maybe map enemy bot concentrations in different parts of the screens
Light thats exactly what I was talking about, I got the Idea and the Strategy from "RedAlert", (PY should know what RedAlert is , he is into strategy games)
-
The problem (as I already explained it) is that the robot does not mutate new stuff at all
I don't get this! :blink:
I never did get it!
In every test that I have ever run (and that would be thousands), robots can and do mutate new stuff all the time.
I even built the scripting system to prove it and that is just what it did.
Try putting a simple robot in the sim thae set up a bunch of scripts that pause the game when a robot mutates a new value (some command that isn't in the original). It may take a while but sooner or later one of the robots WILL evolve the new item.
I have performed this test loads of times and it always works, thus proving that robots do evolve new stuff.
Unless we are using different definitions of stuff
:blink: PY :blink:
-
Okay, here are some things again:
1. DB will probably take longer than other AL sims to reach useful mutations because it is so open ended. Darwinpond (another AL sims) only has like half a dozen different memory locations that can be mutated, each controlling something rather macroscopic about the bot. In darwinbots, the individual commands are much more specific.
Also, until I get to creating a more realistic probablility distribution for one DNA command to turn into another, you are going to see [span style=\'font-size:30pt;line-height:100%\'][you]MOST[/you][/span] of the mutations be either bad or neutral. Turning a refeye into a poison will generally break the genes.
2. Okay, in the one quote where I said unmated, I meant unmutated.
3. I've seen bots evolve that are better from the ancestors. Heck, Carlo's original C_Ancestralis evolved into several different bots that were better than the original. [span style=\'font-size:30pt;line-height:100%\']MUTATIONS DO WORK[/span]. If you can't get them to work than you are doing something [span style=\'font-size:30pt;line-height:100%\']WRONG[/span]
4. If you are not willing to actually wait for mutations and evolution to take hold I strongly recommend finding another AL simulator. Don't try to say mutations don't work if you only give it half an hour. The program does not say "gee, what mutation will be the most beneficial?" Heck, the DNA of most successful bots is hundreds of elements long. Do you have any idea how long that'd take to accumulate by natural mutations?
Please, before anyone says that mutations don't work, [span style=\'font-size:30pt;line-height:100%\']try running the program for most of an afternoon or even a few days[/span].
How many cycles do you run your mutation sims for? 2000? Try 3 million cycles. Then you'll see what I'm talking about.
-
Sorry, teaches me to post right after I wake up (I'm not a morning person).
Here's a bot I mutated:
'#name: Hallowers One Gene Bot.txt
'#generation: 28
'#mutations: 20
cond
*.slime
26289
<
*.nrg
31996
<
start
10
stop
cond
start
*.eye5
10
add
mult
7
div
sub
7
div
sub
.up
store
*.eye5
*.eye1
sub
*.eye5
*.eye2
sub
stop
cond
start
*.trefdx
*.eye3
stop
cond
start
inc
sub
*.eye5
*.eye4
stop
cond
start
sub
add
*.eye4
sub
rnd
add
add
add
4
div
*.eye5
*.eye6
sub
*.mass
rnd
*.eye7
sub
*.eye5
*.eye8
sub
*.eye5
*.eye9
sub
add
add
add
4
div
sub
*.refeye
1
add
mult
5
stop
cond
start
store
stop
cond
start
-6
7
*.refup
sub
store
50
299
*.ypos
add
store
stop
end
'#hash: q?_v/77lB|_r^;CvcNL6
Lotsa stuff in there that's new. Most of it doesn't make sense at all, but you can see that, yes, new stuff sometimes evolves.
-
Nice lest post Num , ok ok , I am working on it...
Found it , (new post)
-
There is a bug in the program that sayes that special mutation rates will do worse then normal once. If I give a bot in the begining its own mutation rates it developed in the lest run, It will do worse then the nonmutating bot. If I give defults witch are ("mofm:2 , 200 , 200 , all 200 , etc.") it will do better then the nonmutating bot.
This mean eather there is a bug or there is some rule of nature that says that defult rates are required for every new match.
At any rate, I have basicaly proven the theory of evolution and now working evolving a bot that can beat Din and the rest of them.
The only problem now is that ("History Repeats Itself") a bot that evolved now does worse agenst a bot 4 runs back then agenst a bot that it evolved agenst. The solution is to save each step of evolution and then evolve the robot agenst multipule bots. That makes me wonder: How well will humens do if the Dinasors are back?
-
There is a bug in the program that sayes that special mutation rates will do worse then normal once.
Huh?
If I give a bot in the begining its own mutation rates it developed in the lest run, It will do worse then the nonmutating bot. If I give defults witch are ("mofm:2 , 200 , 200 , all 200 , etc.") it will do better then the nonmutating bot.
huh?
This mean eather there is a bug or there is some rule of nature that says that defult rates are required for every new match.
huh?
At any rate, I have basicaly proven the theory of evolution and now working evolving a bot that can beat Din and the rest of them.
We all eagerly await.
The only problem now is that ("History Repeats Itself") a bot that evolved now does worse agenst a bot 4 runs back then agenst a bot that it evolved agenst. The solution is to save each step of evolution and then evolve the robot agenst multipule bots.
huh?
That makes me wonder: How well will humens do if the Dinasors are back?
Very well actually. Dinosaurs were very much tropical creatures. The planet is now much cooler than it was in the jurrasic/triassic/cretaceous periods. And we're cutting down the tropics every day, enlarging our own habitats and eliminating rival ones.
-
False call; I got lucky with some settings thats all. :(
Here is some more "huh" for you:
Robots require a sertain setting for them to evolve. They wont evolve under different settings. More specifacly a robot evolving under one setting wont evolve if you put them into a different settings.
-
Some settings give more room for bots to mutate than in others. In real life, not all situations give rise to diversity and complexity. Harsher environments tend to produce faster evolution.
Instead of making broad accusations about the effectiveness of mutations, why not post your results for different settings and those same settings.
schvarz has run alot of mutation sims, maybe he can help you out finding good bots to use and good settings for them.
-
What happend was a bot evoving with 300 max vegs and 1600x1200 resolution will no longer evolve in strictly F1 settings.
The main problem as Num sayed is that there is not enough space on the screen for them to evolve.
I tryed keeping F1 settings and higher resolution (since the screen is x4 area of reguler settings , I have 100 max vegs (25*4) etc.) Seams to work ok.
What I am conserned with is that sudden energy changes in the inv. kills mutating bots faster then nonmutating bots. (How will that work on the grid) But I gess I'll find out when 3.0 is out what really happens.
Also dont forget about (http://s9.invisionfree.com/DarwinBots_Forum/index.php?showtopic=65&st=30) Good Job I finaly seen a bot that evolved new negative values
Num when you say "huh?" what do you mean? , I think that post is fearly easy to comprehand...
-
Ok I am stuck right now again. The Program has created a Bot that Does worse then its nonmutating virsion 99% of the time. I dont know: eather I should post it and let you guys figure it out, or keep trying to mutate it.
This bot does evolve if its in the simulator alone, but I dont know If that will cause it to be better then the original or better then all the other generations that it slowly evolved from. I have a feeling it wont.
<_< Bau
-
300 plants!? Are you nuts!? You'd over feed the thing giving it that much energy. The bot would have no reason to be efficent and wouldn't hardly even need to search for food. You really need to balance out the sim better to get some worthwhile mutations. I normally keep it basically F1 and then play around with either the physics or pond settings to increase the difficulty. You don't necessarily need "space" to get novel species to evolve, you just need a new area with different challenges in it.
Endy ;)
-
Most of the first bots that mutate from a well established original will be worse. That's because mutations are BAD. Evolution is a funny process, going forward and backwards and all around. Don't think of it as a linear process. Think of it like a river. It kind of moves downhill, but it won't take the most direct route, and sometimes it will seem to go backward. Sometimes something slows it and it forms a large lake. Eventually, though, dumb luck will find a useful combination that makes the thing fitter, and it will flow on.
If you want a successful mutation sim, start with a bot that can survive, but just barely. Have it have no bells or whistles, just regular -1 shots and a search and follow gene. Now minimize the program. Step away, and don't touch it.
Come back 3 days later. Is it the same bot? What new behavior does it exhibit? What has the population maxed at?
Now, your first question will be 'is it better?'. Evolution doesn't work like that. Are we 'better' than bacteria? Bacteria outnumber us, can survive in much harsher environments than we can, etc. Whos to say what 'better' is?
Likely, you will just have something new. It might be better, it might not. But whatever it is it will be different.
-
"I tryed keeping F1 settings and higher resolution (since the screen is x4 area of reguler settings , I have 100 max vegs (25*4) etc.) Seams to work ok." I think people should start reading all the posts , and all the parts of the post before replying, (no I dont do that myself , ok ok never mind)
No Endy I know this problem wery well , #1 I am using high resoultions when doing 300 vegs #2 I AM CURRENTLY EVOLVING A BOT ONLY IN F1 SETTINGS BECAUSE ACCORDING TO SOME BUG OR lAW:
QUOTE
"What I am conserned with is that sudden energy changes in the inv. kills mutating bots faster then nonmutating bots. "
Inv. = settings 300 ----> 100
why F1: 100vegs not 25vegs , simple : Higher resolutions = more area = compinsate for increase in area , here quote:
"I tryed keeping F1 settings and higher resolution (since the screen is x4 area of reguler settings , I have 100 max vegs (25*4) etc.) Seams to work ok."
#3 Were is Num , Never mind found him ( he beat me to the post)
#4 READ THE PRIVIUSE POST AND HELP PLEASE... OR TELL ME WHAT TO DO , POST-BOT OR NO POST-BOT
#5 I should go find some jokes to post before we all go insane
-
"
If you want a successful mutation sim, start with a bot that can survive, but just barely. Have it have no bells or whistles, just regular -1 shots and a search and follow gene. Now minimize the program. Step away, and don't touch it.
Come back 3 days later. Is it the same bot? What new behavior does it exhibit? What has the population maxed at?
"
Thats what I am basicaly doing, and I was producing "better" bots until now , not by "running a simple mutation sim" but by a system witch I already explained (read posts)
Just tell me to post the original and the evolved bot I am stuck on and I will. Tell me were to post them , in the bistary , or here or were...
Likely, you will just have something new. It might be better, it might not. But whatever it is it will be different.
I got results like that the first time I ran the program. I know we can get better results from my own experiments If not: then I would have forgot about DB a long time ago, and I would have never made any of my own mutations sims.
-
If the evolved version is different enough to constitute a new species (you be the judge) go ahead and post it in the beastiary.
The bestairy is pretty open, post any bots you can think of.
Here's a bot ripe for evolution. It is the bare minimum. (Okay, not minimum, since it manages to beat a couple of the SG league entrants.
Called Animal_Minimalis (I'll post it the the beastiary too).
cond
*.eye5 0 >
*.refeye *.myeye !=
start
*.refveldx .dx store
*.refvelup 30 add .up store
stop
cond
*.eye5 50 >
*.refeye *.myeye !=
start
-1 .shoot store
*.refvelup .up store
stop
cond
*.eye5 0 =
*.refeye *.myeye = or
start
314 rnd .aimdx store
stop
cond
*.nrg 20000 >
start
10 .repro store
stop
end
The idea is that it is so minimal that any changes will affect its most basic behaviors. I'll run some simulations too, see if anyone can get a version from it that exhibits any new behavior (storing to body to get stronger shots, using poison, learning to turn when somethings in eye4, etc.)
Bots, your larger sims are running slowly, right? 3.0 should allow larger sims like that with the new speedups I'm working on. Larger sims should mean larger population samples, which might mean more interesting mutation sims.
-
Thx Num , but I think I'll post my own "starter-bot" to
This is the robot is started with:
http://s9.invisionfree.com/DarwinBots_Foru...p?showtopic=155 (http://s9.invisionfree.com/DarwinBots_Forum/index.php?showtopic=155)
This robot does "better" then the robot above:
http://s9.invisionfree.com/DarwinBots_Foru...p?showtopic=156 (http://s9.invisionfree.com/DarwinBots_Forum/index.php?showtopic=156)
Its the evolved virsion. But it has a glitch: If it is fighting its not mutating self , the not mutating self wins 99% of the time.
:help:
:evil: :bigginangel: :evil:
-
Here I posted my bots, help if you can;
I also wanted to add that I have 256mb Ram and 1.50Ghz, also: My system is not cluged up by usless programs when I run DB.
Endy, the problem is when there is a change in the max number of vegs. in the invirment the problem above happens automaticaly, I dont even have to wait until generations evolve to cause the problem. 300 vegs on high resolution means 75 vegs on low resolution , so that change is addapteble: its only from 75 --> 25 vegs. A robot should be able to evolve to survive under new settings, why it does not is what I am trying to figure out.
-
Bots,
what kind of frame rate are you getting for your sims? How many robots do you run in your usual simulations?
-
Ok this is what I rimember from the 300 vegs experiment. In about 45 minutes it ran 100000 cycles. 300 vegs feed about 50 FirstBots.
Num, my speed is fine, dont get off topic please. Just beleave me I run the simulations long enugh and fast enugh. At higher resolutions just clickying the "turn display off" dramaticaly inproves performance.
Num, Shvartz, Do you understand the way I mutated this bot4g? I did not just leave a simulation running. As Num sayed: Watching a simulation for 3 days does not produce "better" bots.
Shvartz Because then you will understand how I figured out that mutation rates do not work.
-
Bots, when you say 4g is "better", what do you mean by that? How is it better if it is losing to the original bot?
-
You must of done some really funny settings shvartz...
-
Shvartz try doing F1 conditions , and disable all mutations.
BETTER QUSTION: What settings did you use shvartz?
-
Num , Shvartz left but you still here , what to do with all this info,. what do you think? mutation rate bugs , the problem with bot4g , etc.
-
It may be that the unmutated version is better against other bots, while the mutated version is used to living in a situation where there are no competitors.
Also, 4 generations is tiny tiny. 100 generations would be the minimum before I'd expect to see mutations racking up to actual evolution. On the scale you're talking about you're just seeing random change, without an opportunity to sort out the good from the bad.
-
OK Bots, here is what I think happened (I have to guess, cause you don't say it):
You started some sim (not F1 settings) with First bot. let it run for a long time and it evolved into 4g. Then you put them into F1 mode and First bot wins. What did you prove? That your 4g bot is adapted to the settings that you used to evolve it, not to F1 settings. Exactly what you would expect.
-
The problem is that the mutated virsion does better agenst other bots and agenst the unmutated virsion.
"On the scale you're talking about you're just seeing random change, without an opportunity to sort out the good from the bad. " I am sorting the good exactly form the bad because my robot is supposed to evolve agenst [you]itself [/you]with mutations turned off. not agenst the robot I started with or the [you]unmutated[/you] robot. (one copy of the robot evolves the other one does not, when the copy that does not evolve dies out I save the new produced robot as a new generation, I already tryed to explain this in earlyer posts.)
non-mutating is not unmutated in any way.
-
"Then you put them into F1 mode and First bot wins." FirstBot does not win shvartz, how are you getting this results? what are your settings?
"You started some sim (not F1 settings) with First bot." If I did that then first bot would not win anyway. There is some kind of bug/law that says even: non mutating clone does better then mutating clone in different settings.
It says also: If mutating clone has defult mutation rates, non mutating clone does worse then mutating clone in same settings but If mutating clone has mutation rates used by itself from the lest run, non mutating clone does better then mutating clone in same settings.
and: non mutating clone does worse then mutating clone in same settings for only 4 runs , after that: non mutating clone does better then mutating clone in same settings (clone from run 4 in run 5)
-
Okay, I finally understand what you're doing.
You're loading up two copies of the same species. One has mutations enabled in the mutations panel (that is, they're set to non zero values). The other copy has mutations disabled by pressing the disable mutations button in the mutations panel.
Right?
That either species is dying out doesn't make much sense, especially after so few cycles. The answer to why the mutating version can't beat the non mutating version in F1 mode is simple: the mutated version must not be the thing killing off the non mutating version.
So the question then becomes what is killing it off, and why can the mutating version survive it?
-
"let it run for a long time and it evolved into 4g." no shvartz , I toled everyone to read post carfully it did not just evolve into 4g in one simple run. Its a complex system I run mutating clones agenst not mutating clones of the same robot. Then take the resulting robot and repeat the prosses . Above I listed bugs/laws that prevent me from going further in different settings or with better mutation rates or after about 4 runs.
'What did you prove? That your 4g bot is adapted to the settings that you used to evolve it, not to F1 settings. Exactly what you would expect. " , Well if its playing agenst itself weather it is addapted or not it should do better or the same. Thats why I want you to give me the settings shvartz were firstbot (witch is supposebly 4 runs worse then bot4g) beats bot4g. Post the numbers for settings shvartz
-
The answer to why the mutating version can't beat the non mutating version in F1 mode is simple: the mutated version must not be the thing killing off the non mutating version.
In true F1 mode mutations are disabled , In my mode the mutating virsion has mutation rates: 2mofm the rest are 200m
what I mean by mofm is the mutation rates of mutation on top in the form.
P.S.
:blink: Now I am bigging to realize how hard it is for people to undertand me , dam , $#% what to do? go back to elementry school $#% ? , ...
-
That either species is dying out doesn't make much sense, especially after so few cycles. The answer to why the mutating version can't beat the non mutating version in F1 mode is simple: the mutated version must not be the thing killing off the non mutating version.
I like that one B)
I mean really look at me , who is this kid big mouthing about revolutionary ideas: that mutation actualy makes bots better, thats why they can beat the robots that do not mutate. (hint: now make mutating robots lose energy artefisialy so they will be worse then non-mutating robots again ;) ) I mean really what planet is this?
Good News: I got lucky this run finaly , I got a bot5g on my hard disk :)
Not so good News:
the mutated version [you]must not be the thing [/you]killing off the non mutating version.
The minds of this people , go to love it. Thats why I gave a nice hint so by the next virsion they will find a "fix" to this mutating robots bug , thouse %$ robots...
lol or, hint: lets make thouse %$ robots gain energy artefidialy that way they will never evolve to be more better then themselfs because they will be better then themselfs already...
better one! hint: Lets mess up that $&&^ mutation system even more , that way thouse robots cant evolve to be better then themselfs because they wont be able to.
for slower Db public ( I am having a small sarcasm episote)
-
ok I feel better,
Num, So the question then becomes what is killing it off, and why can the mutating version survive it? I think there is no third player here, I think that the mutating robots can beat the non-mutating robots just because the mutating robots addapt to do so.
why can the mutating version survive it? Why did the Dna trasform us to survive the period when there was no longer waste but only photosynthesis and hunting possible?
So I think whats really happening here is that the mutating virsion is addapting to survive its bad offspring or the offspring that evolved to do worse.
Stay tooned for a bot99g or so , witch will finaly beat Din... If there is any more bumbs along the way and if I feal like you guys can help me , I will post the new bugs/laws here.
Btw I did not give away all the rules of my system of evolving bots, There is a rule in the universe that says "History Repeats Itself", there is a solution to this rule as well. B)
-
There is some kind of bug/law that says non mutating clone does better then mutating clone in different settings.
If mutating clone has defult mutation rates, non mutating clone does worse then mutating clone in same settings but If mutating clone has mutation rates used by itself from the lest run, non mutating clone does better then mutating clone in same settings.
This the stuff I am still having trouble with, If any one is smart enough to figure out how to go arround this problems...
-
It's not a law or a bug, it's just circumstances. Sometimes it will be true, sometimes not. It depends.
Your time span is too small for evolution to really create a strong difference between the two. What you really have is two very similar subspecies. Less than subspecies even. Breed might be a better word.
If you were to keep going on and on, eventually you will have two seperate species, likely the mutated version hunting the unmated version very efficiently.
Try setting the unmutated version as a plant. See what happens, it might make a difference.
But really, like I said before, evolution is too non linear. It does crazy things that don't make sense to us. Evolution is not trying to get 'better'. It's just a mindless system of rules that rewards those who exploit it best.
-
So you saying: If I keep the mutation rates and/or change the energy settings, I have to first evolve the mutated bot agenst the unmutated version as a plant.
Tryed it, the plant kills off the robots. Does not help any of the two problems in anyway...
Anyway
If you were to keep going on and on, eventually you will have two seperate species, likely the mutated version hunting the unmated version very efficiently.
Hopefully very efficiently enough to take out the tournament bots as well.
-
Are you talking about the graph for species energy?
I noticed similar spikes like you say and found them linked to population sizes, ie more bots means nrg is divided more evenly amongst them, less bots means more energy held by individual bots. Most of the time I found this to be linked directly to the changing frequency of mutation rates but occasionally it seemed to be waste related(DB's vers of polution :D ).
Generally, from our point of view it is better that the nrg be shared, not only does this mean more chances for intersting behaviors but it also prevents the very few bots remaining with all the nrg suddenly dying out(large spike followed by sudden dip.)
The bot you posted at first glance seems to be geared towards H-nrg enviroments. I am not sure wether it is reproducing randomly or not(storage at val 300) The nrg level required is high, but there are several 300's scattered throughout, which may be activated by a stack overflow. I've seen it go both ways on this one either a high nrg level to cut down competition or a low/rnd nrg level to rapidly spread.
Luck with mutating,
Endy :bigginangel:
-
Endy You are far more lost there then Num , I wont even bother( yea yea I did bother ) , just delete that stuped post.
:burnup: :burnup: :burnup:
No endy I am not doing what you are doing at all , we are building two different worlds here, figure out what I am doing before you post anything...
Endy , Nice way to piss me off , better then MP
-
:clap:
Man, and I thought I was the master of pissing off Bots!
-
Ok Haha , now: num , endy , MP , and shvartz pissed me of in half an hour , new record. Lets see if Henk and PY can catch up.
-
Here is some Server space waste just for you endy.
Num:
Okay, I finally understand what you're doing.
You're loading up two copies of the same species. One has mutations enabled in the mutations panel (that is, they're set to non zero values). The other copy has mutations disabled by pressing the disable mutations button in the mutations panel.
Right?
That either species is dying out doesn't make much sense, especially after so few cycles. The answer to why the mutating version can't beat the non mutating version in F1 mode is simple: the mutated version must not be the thing killing off the non mutating version.
So the question then becomes what is killing it off, and why can the mutating version survive it?
brb ill get more.
Me:
Shvartz:
You started some sim[you] (not F1 settings) [/you]with First bot.
[you] If I did that[/you] then first bot [you]would not win anyway[/you]. There is some kind of bug/law that says even: non mutating clone does better then mutating clone in different settings.
That one means that I run all my latest tests in only F1 settings because going from setting to setting does not work.
-
The idea of setting one as plant was just an idea. Sorry it didn't work out. :/
-
some more server space waste just for Endy.
Me:
I dont even have to wait until generations evolve to cause the problem. 300 vegs on high resolution means 75 vegs on low resolution , so that change is addapteble: its only from 75 --> 25 vegs. A robot should be able to evolve to survive under new settings, why it does not is what I am trying to figure out.
That talks about a nice little theory I have developed:
A size 2 screen's area is 4 times the area of a size one screen (you can change screen sizes in the settings), furthermore:
if you have 25 vegs in size1 screen that means in size two to keep the energy blance you need 25x4=100 vegs. you see? no see?
So therefore its true in reverse too:
In size two 300 vegs is only 75 vegs in size one.
Hold that thought , I got more:
Me:
There is some kind of bug/law that says non mutating clone does better then mutating clone in different settings.
That means even a small change from 75 to 25 vegs. kills of the mutating clone faster then the nonmutating clone , and therefor messing up the system.
So thats why I Stooooppeeeddd using 75 vegs. and now use [you]only[/you] 25 vegs.
Since I am using size2 , In reality I am using 100 vegs. (Too mutch eh?) But It should not effect the robots in any way , exsept that the distance to the screen boarders is greater, (like the robots care about the boarders)
-
The only logic flaw is that you're assuming that the distribution of vegs in the larger version is the same as the smaller version. Vegs tend to come together in clumps, so 100 vegs in size 2 is not the same as 25 vegs in size 1.
If a bot manages to find a veg clump in your version it will be disproportionately rewarded compared to finding a clump in F1.
-
Another problem is that the sempling size is too small for the robots to have time to evolve.
Yes Good one Num, that is one of the factors , thx
Turning Blocked off helps with the problem a little. but anyway:
I gess I have no choise exsept to switch to true F1 mode.
Now its time to figure out the mutation rates problem.
-
__________________
|..................................|
|..................................|
|..................................|
|_________________|
|
|
|
|
I admit defeat.
Endy
-
lol funny one Endy , thx I needed that.
-
welcome B)
-
I can't find the link to the semi-released version. Could someone post it? I am getting impatient :)
-
I've been distributing it by email informally.
Posting it might be an idea...