You are the one making a wrong biological analogy. Architecture isn't comparable to genes any more than training data is comparable to genes, and training data

You are the one making a wrong biological analogy. Architecture isn't comparable to genes any more than training data is comparable to genes, and training data isn't comparable to environment, doing these kind of analogies brings you nothing but false confidence and misunderstanding. What they do in the paper on the other hands is to apply the methods of biology, and get a result that is akin to phylogeny, not from a biological analogy but from a biologically-inspired method.