NO MORE OVERFLOW

[Botsareus]

Ok never put all your mutation rates less then 200 , you wont get any overflows but the robots will mutate to fast.

Now to solve the fatal error problem in 2.36.2 do this: Put your mutation rate of mutation rates to 1, thats right to 1. I have no idea how or why that stops it seems to do so, I only ran one simulation maybe it was just luck, but hey try anyway.

****

In other news:

The rate of change of mutation rates is changing the mutation values to slow even if it is set to 1, strange things; the maximum change I got was for "delete instruction" witch was from 200 --> 220 , I want to see stuff like from 200 ---> 1500 if I set it to 1. It also should matter based on size:  

change from 200 ---> 1500

is only

change from 26 ----> 200

on smaller scales.

I am not sure if it already works like that, I have a feeling it does but the changes are to short the way I already explained. with a change of 1 its must be 200 ---> 1500 , 26 ---> 200 ...

[PurpleYouko]

Why would you want mutation rates to change that rapidly?  :blink:

It should be a gradual thing, not a giant leap into the unkown.

All the mutations in 2.36.2 now adapt at a rate proportional to the present size of a value. I used a Gaussian plot to control the change of values. The minimum range is 100 (so that a very low value such as 1 or 2 is still able to mutate) but as the values get higher the range is restricted to 10% of the present value.

In 2.36.1 all values are 100% random from -32000 up to +32000

[Botsareus]

:devil: I am evil monkey thats why  :devil:

[Botsareus]

what does my post say, The mutation rate of mutation rates , does not change rates fast enough should be 200-> 1500 on 1 at least. We need that so if robots deside not to mutate a sertain rate the change will be atleast notisable:

Ok what I mean is on 1 the change must be 200 -----> (2000*rnd) on avrage ---> 1100

on 26 must be ----> (266 * rnd) on avrage ---> 146

I think that causes a lot of errors when it is on mutation rate of mutation rates: 20 or 30 or bigger.

But no, no sutch thing , I am evil thats why I say this thing.

[Botsareus]

Keyword mutation rate of mutation rate = 1!!!!!!!! (not 100!!!!!!) then it should be BIG CHANGE....


When it is 100 it should be small change , (not "this program has caused a fatel error please send it to microslot bc kids should not be messing with softwear like that  anyway, we call it an error report for good mesure")

[PurpleYouko]

Yup
I was right.

Completely bloody Barking mad!  :wacko:

[Numsgil]

It's my opinion that bots (the little circle things, not the person) shouldn't be able to mess with the mutation rates anyway.  A smart bot will just evolve to keep them as low as possible.  Probably anyway.  I'd recommend keeping it at 0.

[Botsareus]

Thats not true num, a smart bot will not evolve to have no mutation rates, I DONT WANT THE BOTS TO BE ABLE TO SET IT TO ZERO AT ALL. WHY? SIMPLE NUM, I KNOW FOR A FACT THAT MUTATION MAKES THINGS BETTER!!!!!! , IT DOES NOT DESTROY THINGS NUM, CORRECT MUTATION WILL MAKE THINGS BETTER NUM!!!!!
IF ONLY I HAD MY OLD FILES I WOULD PROVE IT TO YOU NUM, SO SAD THAT I DONT HAVE MY OLD FILES.

. A smart bot will just evolve to keep them as low as possible.

why would you say somthing like that? DB is currently not a good example of a mutation sim Num... Don't base everything on what you seen in DB.

[Numsgil]

While the cumulative effect of mutations over many, many generations generally produces better results than the precursor, any SINGLE bot would be wise to not allow mutations.

Why is that?

Imagine this:
You have a kid.  It's healthy and normal.  I tell you that there's a 99.9% chance that what I'm about to do will kill it, but there's a .1% chance that it will raise its IQ by 3 points.  Would you do it?

Now imagine I did that to every kid in the world.  Sure there'd only be a few million people left, but they'd all be smarter.  Right.  Still not a good move.

Now imagine I did it randomly to every thousandth kid that was born over the course of all human history.  The parents have no choice.  It doesn't adversely effect the entire human population, and it doesn't really effect most kids.  Some kids though will gain that 3 points of IQ.  Over time (say millions of years) you'd expect to see a massive increase in the intelligence of humans.

Mutations are like that.  Most, especially for smaller bots, are destructive.  You'd be a fool to let your kids have any chance at all of mutating.  You obviously were successful enough to survive.  What's wrong with your own genes?

But a species would be very wise to let itself mutate.  Slowly, ever so slowly, of course.  It's a funny dichotomy.  The same problem exists with cooperative bacteria.  Why do some cooperate to help others when it means their death?  From their point of view it means they can't pass on their genes.  Cheaters could develop that take advantage of them.

From the species' point of view it makes sense though.  If two together are stornger than two appart, you want them to work like that.

That's what I mean.  Remember, evolution, according to modern biologists, only works from the individual's point of view, sicne it is individuals that must compete and reproduce.

[Carlo]

Sorry, Nums, I can't understand your point. At the end of your post you say "evolution, only works from the individul's point of view". And that's right. So, how can you say that the interest of single robots should be to keep their mutation rates at 0, because mutation is in the species' interest?
If evolution works from the individual's point of view, and species evolve, this must be because mutating is in the individual's interest.
View it this way. Many biologists even say that evolution works from the gene point of view, that is mutation is in the interest of the genes, not even the individuals. Suppose you have a robot with n genes, and one of those genes is able to specify the global mutation rates for that robot. That gene should be more likely to spread if it triggers little enough mutations to preserve the dna functionality, but, at the same time, it has to trigger some because this increase its probability to spread in an environment subject to slow changes.
Anyway, I did some experiments with DarwinBots some time ago. I took some kind of rather primitive robot (like C. Circumgirans, or so) and cloned it (loaded it two times in the same simulation), creating two teams. One of them had a zero mutation rate, and the other one a low mutation rate, greater than zero. Then a ran a few simulations, and - surprise!- usually the team with a non-zero mutation rate won the sim. Well, now you have teams and auto reloading of sims with stats, so you can make some more accurate study about it. Who wants to try?

Bye, C.

[Endy]

The bots can mutate "naturally" without setting any mutation rates. With waste occasionally a bot will store something in mrepro. I haven't done any long term experiments yet but it's interesting to watch.

Endy B)

[Carlo]

The bots can mutate "naturally" without setting any mutation rates. With waste occasionally a bot will store something in mrepro.

Oh God, my knowledge of DarwinBots is sooo outdated.
On the other side, sometimes a find asking myself - possible that they _really_ know each of the tons of interactions rules they have put in it?   :)

[Numsgil]

If evolution works from the individual's point of view, and species evolve, this must be because mutating is in the individual's interest.

Close.  Remember that real organisms can't really control thier own mutation rates.  When they copy DNA, they try very hard to keep it as accurate as possible.

So my point is that species evolve because individuals can't control their own rate of mutation.

That's my hypothesis anyway.  Try a sim with two teams: one with rates of mutations rates of mutations set to like 1, the other with set to 0.  Keep the simulation settings changing from time to time.  Run it a few times (note that Dom Inv can beat itself in a sim with 0 mutations within a few thousand cycles).

See what happens.

[Botsareus]

Num try the same thing with the rates set to 200 , try it a couple of times, not to mesion it should work with the "broken mutations" and still make the bots better.

Your din thats not mutating should die out Num, thats how I evolved bot4g rimember?

[Shen]

IMO it all depends on so many factors that unless you have a specific idea in mind you cant really say. For example if I run my killer multibot Dimacheri with mutations it will definatly lose against a non mutating version simply because its so complicated, even a minor change will completly screw it up. But on the other hand something very basic will survive mutations much more easily.

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. But how about using the triggers to alter the veggie feed/repop rates? Say like..

IF 'Number of Bots more than 100' THEN 'set veggie feed rate at 5'

Ill post this in the suggestions thread.. :)