RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (14) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: Evolutionary Computation, Stuff that drives AEs nuts< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Posts: 2723
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 25 2009,11:00   

Quote (dvunkannon @ June 25 2009,10:07)
I assume you mean the scaling of fitness by total population fitness used in routlette selection, correct?

Yes, the scaling determines probability of successful reproduction.  

Quote (dvunkannon @ June 25 2009,10:07)
I'm not following the dissection of MA, is work_fitness being used to drive a selection algorithm? If so, the division by rnd() is equivalent to assuming that all selection takes place after a night of drinking heavily.

Close, but not quite. Actual reproductive success involves more than mating selection. There is still a strong component of phylogenetic health involved. Reproductively healthier individuals will tend to mate more often and produce more offspring, even when they mate randomly. (Perhaps you should spend more time in bars—for observational purposes, of course.)

Quote (dvunkannon @ June 25 2009,10:07)
Roulette selection assumes that details don't matter - of several equally snappily dressed men at the bar, the one with the clean fingernails will not be selected much more frequently than the rest with dirty fingernails. Is this "realistic"?

Yes. Minor differences tend to have minor effects. There is no amplification for discernment. Like the bar at 10 PM rather than 1 AM (i.e. after only moderate alcohol consumption).

Quote (dvunkannon @ June 25 2009,10:07)
What does MA assume about sexual selection?

It doesn't (as far as I know).


You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

  419 replies since Mar. 17 2009,11:00 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (14) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   

Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]