Difference between revisions of "Talk:King Bot"

Revision as of 17:17, 26 February 2006

would someone please explain how it does so?
exactly where in this code is the number of offspring entered?
what does s(t,1,2,0) mean? how might one use other factors, weighted or whatever, to contribute
to the score?

what is InvestedEnergy(t)?

how about a breakdown of the code or some hints using the discussion tab above?
a clue, a hint ... anything! tnx Griz^talk 16:37, 25 Feb 2006 (MST)

When I found this code several months ago (probably closer to 10 or 11) I wanted to modify it so that the king bot was the bot with the most "invested energy", by which I meant the total energy reserves, body reserves, shell, slime, etc. of it and all its descendants. That is where the InvestedEnergy(t) function came in.

However, for a reason I could never figure out the code didn't work. No bot was ever found to be the king for some reason (no bot was ever highlighted), so I changed InvestedEnergy(t) to return always 1 (and thus go back to the previous behavior of most offspring being King (each offspring is given a score of 1)).

To be honest the function is a mess, one of the few areas of the code (this and ties pretty much) that I have hardly touched to clean up. You can see the chaotic way in which Carlo (I assume it was him) coded much of the code.

The score function itself is recursive (it calls itself), which isn't a bad way to search through a tree (in this case, a phylogenic tree) mind you. However he threw 4 different ideas into a single recursive function. It searches for offspring, highlights offspring, draws family lines, and searches for the oldest ancestor. Granted they're somewhat closely related functions, but recursive functions are a headache enough in and of themselves without 4 different ideas thrown in there. --Numsgil 17:58, 25 Feb 2006 (MST)

I hear ya!

in the interest of keeping it simple ...

shouldn't one be able to add additional 'scores' right here in the FittestFunction?

iow ... right after, or instead of, s=score(t,1,2,0) ...

couldn't one add s=s+ rob(t).age or rob(t).kills or .mutations, whatever?

i'm thinking something like s=# of offspring/age might be more telling about

fittness than a straight # of offspring.

one should be able to 'weight' these in any way one wishes ...

s=s+ rob(t).age * some K or constants + rob(t).kills * a constant, etc.

this

seems to work.

' returns the fittest robot (selected through the score function)  'not any more - griz
' altered from the bot with the most generations
' to the bot with the most invested energy in itself and children
Function fittest() As Integer
 Dim t As Integer
 Dim s As Double
 Dim s1 As Double
 Dim Mx As Double
 Mx = 0
 For t = 1 To MaxRobs
   If rob(t).Exist And Not rob(t).Veg Then
     's = score(t, 1, 2, 0) ' old scoring

     's = rob(t).SonNumber / rob(t).age      '# of offspring/age

     s = rob(t).SonNumber * 10 + rob(t).nrg / 1000 + rob(t).body / 100  
    'Num's Invested Energy plus #offspring ... all scaled

       If s >= Mx Then 'NOTE when higher = fittest
       'If s <=Mx Then 'when lower values = fittest    
       Mx = s
       fittest = t
                 'just for debugging info
                  's1 = rob(fittest).nrg  s1 = rob(fittest).body s1 = rob(fittest).SonNumber
                  's1 = rob(fittest).age s1 = rob(fittest).AbsNum
       
     End If
   End If
 Next t
End Function

s = rob(t).SonNumber * 10 + rob(t).nrg / 1000 + rob(t).body / 100

works, a value of 5 offspring adds 50, and energy of 30000 = 30, body of 1200 = 12.

so all these values contribute ... but of course the Invested Energy is only that of
the bot itself, and not the energy of it's offspring and their offspring. but ... this at least works ... and will provide a way to customize fittest bot selection.

now i just need to figure out how to determine what variables one wants to use and

to scale them from some input window. and hints would be appreciated. Griz^talk 14:42, 26 Feb 2006 (MST)

Try doing s = score(t,1,2,0) + rob(t).nrg... and add your weights in that way. That should work I think, while still preserving the original intent. --Numsgil 15:17, 26 Feb 2006 (MST)