Difference between revisions of "Sexrepro experiment"
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
Results: | Results: | ||
| − | [[Day3]] | + | 1st Place [[Day3]] |
| − | [[Day2]] | + | 2nd Place [[Day2]] |
| − | [[Day1]] | + | 3rd Place[[Day1]] |
| − | [[Initial robot]] | + | 4th Place[[Initial robot]] |
| − | [[Day5]] | + | 5th Place[[Day5]] |
| − | [[Day4]] | + | 6th Place[[Day4]] |
As you can see the robots' survival efficiency generally did improve as the experiment went on. | As you can see the robots' survival efficiency generally did improve as the experiment went on. | ||
The most interesting idea we deduct from this experiment is that, instead of making field size as large as possible, sometimes it is a good idea to make the field size as small as possible for more selective pressure. | The most interesting idea we deduct from this experiment is that, instead of making field size as large as possible, sometimes it is a good idea to make the field size as small as possible for more selective pressure. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The reason days 5 and 6 are worse is probably that the costs of maintain the DNA overpowered the need for basic survival. As you can see days 5 and 6 DNA is smaller. | ||
Revision as of 14:37, 31 May 2014
The following experiment was created by Botsareus (Paul Kononov) to see if robots' survival abilities improve when: 1.) It undergoes forced sexual reproduction with asexual reproduction being disabled. 2.) Restricted field size for higher selective pressure. 3.) Test was conducted over 5 days, with a specimen being saved each day. 4.) A normal reproduction gene has been spliced back to test the robots overall survival ability effectively in the following test:
The test is a stepladder league with most basic settings, default battle costs, and full trans-species recognition fudging.
Results:
1st Place Day3
2nd Place Day2
3rd PlaceDay1
4th PlaceInitial robot
5th PlaceDay5
6th PlaceDay4
As you can see the robots' survival efficiency generally did improve as the experiment went on.
The most interesting idea we deduct from this experiment is that, instead of making field size as large as possible, sometimes it is a good idea to make the field size as small as possible for more selective pressure.
The reason days 5 and 6 are worse is probably that the costs of maintain the DNA overpowered the need for basic survival. As you can see days 5 and 6 DNA is smaller.
