4 ms·
>remember the 'best of previous generations In nature, immortality doesn't seem to lead to much evolution. remember that immortal jellyfish some japanese scien
by dragonbonheur 11y ago
>remember the 'best of previous generations
In nature, immortality doesn't seem to lead to much evolution. remember that immortal jellyfish some japanese scientist discovered a while ago that went back to its polyp phase once it got mature? Besides, sometimes species devolve too in nature. I just accept mortality and obsolescence as they are.
- frikk 11y agohehe. That's fine. It all depends on the nature of the experiment. Typically you want to optimize a solution in a given deterministic domain. If you wish to, instead, create an open-ended evolutionary system for novelty in a non-deterministic solution space, go for it! Although, to be fair, in nature you're also not dealing with a static fitness function, a high mutation rate, and there's a wide myriad of other variables that affect the overall dynamics of a population (like sexual vs asexual reproduction, migration, recessive genes, sexual selection, etc)
- dragonbonheur 11y agoYou're absolutely right. I've been wondering what results i would get if I seeded all of the population with the reference image data, slightly mutated but let the GA look for variations with a 10 or 20% variation tolerance.