Alt-BEAM Archive
Message #02390
To: JVernonM@aol.com
From: Steven Bolt sbolt@xs4all.nl
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 12:46:28 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [alt-beam] Re: CPU again? (was Beam genome)
On Fri, 16 Apr 1999 JVernonM@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 4/15/99 4:17:37 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> sbolt@xs4all.nl writes:
>
> > > I think we need to create a series of trials that mimic real
> > > world behaviors of insects and other simple animals. After all,
> > > the goal is evolution!
You're quoting me quoting Bob Shannon there :)
I replied:
I would prefer tasks which allow a clear winner criterion, as
opposed to a jury deciding that "this robot behaves most like an
insect," or "this one is clearly the coolest."
> That's kind of what the BEAM games are meant to do. I don't think it
> succeeds, however. You are right in that the tasks should be survival
> relevant. I think the competition should promote mechanical as well as
> electronic innovation.
I'd like to see a contest aimed at promoting task-oriented
innovation. Without a clear winner criterion - like task performed
and fastest - the `evolution' is imho a tad soft.
> Criteria could be set for making bots more efficient and sturdy.
> I envision a day when the bots can climb out of the arena,
> changing the rules themselves!
Perhaps you could dream up a few tasks to kick them on the way?
Preferrably in a well-defined, easily built `arena', so a kind of
competition is possible without everyone getting together. People
could report results, and those reporting too optimistically would
get caught when others try the supposedly successful design
themselves.
Best,
Steve
----------------------------------------------------------------------
# sbolt@xs4all.nl # Steven Bolt # popular science monthly KIJK #
----------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/alt-beam
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com
Home