4 ms·
> Later I discovered CoreWar [2] and enjoyed that until I learned all of the main classes of algorithms/bots had been identified. The evolvers sometimes break
by someguyorother 5y ago
> Later I discovered CoreWar [2] and enjoyed that until I learned all of the main classes of algorithms/bots had been identified.
The evolvers sometimes break the bomber-scanner-paper stereotype. They just don't scale well to normal sized cores.
I wonder if one could make a better ML system than genetic programming for creating CoreWar warriors. Perhaps a neural net connected to a differentiable SAT solver?
- SavantIdiot 5y ago> The evolvers sometimes break the bomber-scanner-paper stereotype. They just don't scale well to normal sized cores. That's interesting that you're familiar with how it scales to different cores; I've never played around with the core parameters that much./ In fact, it's been about 12 years since I last played around with CoreWars, so I'm not up on the newest theories. It would be interesting to see how a genetic algorithm fares against current ML strategies. I'm completely in the dark as to how AlphaGo/AlphaZero work, I only know classifiers/SSD/autoencoders. Would be fun to learn with this environment tho.
- someguyorother 5y ago> That's interesting that you're familiar with how it scales to different cores; I've never played around with the core parameters that much. It's simply the combinatorial explosion: it's easier to find a surprising and good program in ten lines with pointers limited to a max value of 800, than with hundred lines and a pointer max value of 8000.