Modeling the Evolution of Coordinated Movement Strategies Using Digital Organisms

  • Zaki Ahmad KhanEmail author
  • Faraz Hasan
  • Gabriel Yedid
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 955)


Intelligence is a fundamental characteristic of living beings. Even the simplest organisms exhibit intelligent behaviors in their routine actions. There are various levels of problems in computational science where evolutionary computation shows great potential for finding optimal or near-optimal solutions to problems that defy traditional analytical approaches. In line with this, an advanced problem associated with the evolution of movement in biological communities is examined here. We used the Avida digital life platform to explore the evolution of movements in model environments with a fixed landmark. Three prevailing movement strategies that emerged, Cockroach, Ziggurat, and Climber, show how both environmental constraints and movement coordination play a role in the emergence of intelligent behavior.


Avida Digital organism Beacon Habitat Coordinated stasis 



This work was supported by a grant from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (project # 31470435) to Gabriel Yedid. The authors wish to thank Dr. Laura Grabowski (University of Texas-Rio Grande Valley, Edinburg, TX, USA) for introduction to the vision model used in this work, and Dr. Matthew Rupp and Dr. Wesley Elsberry (Michigan State University, MI, USA) for useful discussion and assistance with experimental design and implementation.


  1. 1.
    Grabowski, L.M., Bryson, D.M., Dyer, F.C., Pennock, R.T., Ofria, C.: Clever creatures: case studies of evolved digital organism. In: 11th European Conference on the synthesis and simulation of Living Systems, pp. 276–283. Paris (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Elsberry, W.R., Grabowski, L.M., Ofria, C., Pennock, R.T.: Cockroaches, drunkards and climber: modeling the evolution of simple movement strategies using digital organisms. In: 2009 IEEE Symposium on Artificial Life, pp. 92–99. Nashville (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brett, E.C.: Coordinated stasis reconsidered: a perspective at fifteen years. In: Talent, J.A. (ed.) Earth and Life. International Year of Planet Earth, pp. 23–36. Springer, Dordrecht (2012). Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gould, S.J.: The structure of evolutionary theory. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Roese, J., Risenhoover, K., Folse, L.: Habitat heterogeneity and foraging efficiency: an individual-based model. Ecol. Model. 57, 133–143 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Forrest, S., Jones, T.: Modeling complex adaptive systems with echo. Complex Syst.: Mech. Adapt. (1994)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Booth, G.: Gecko: a continuous 2D world for ecological modeling. Artif. Life 3(3), 147–163 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yamada, S.: Evolutionary behavior learning for action-based environment modeling by a mobile robot. Appl. Soft Comput. 5(2), 245–257 (2005)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mahdavi, S., Bentley, P.: Innately adaptive robotics through embodied evolution. Auton. Robots 20(2), 149–163 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Matsushita, K., Yokoi, H., Arai, T.: Pseudo-passive dynamic walkers designed by coupled evolution of the controller and morphology. Robot. Auton. Syst. 54, 674–685 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cooper, T., Ofria, C.: Evolution of stable ecosystems in populations of digital organisms. In: 8th International Conference on Artificial Life, Sydney, pp. 227–232 (2002)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ofria, C., Wilke, O.C.: Avida: a software platform for research in computational evolutionary biology. Artif. Life 10, 191–229 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Adami, C., Ofria, C., Collier, T.C.: Evolution of biological complexity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 97, 4463–4468 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lenski, R.E., Ofria, C., Pennock, R.T., Adami, C.: The evolutionary origin of complex features. Nature 423, 139–144 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Beckmann, B., Grabowski, L.M., McKinley, P., Ofria, C.: An autonomic software development methodology based on darwinian evolution. In: 5th IEEE International Conference on Autonomic Computing, pp. 202–203. Chicago (2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Abeywickrama, D.B., Ovaska, E.: A survey of autonomic computing methods in digital service ecosystems. Serv. Ori. Comp. Appl. 11, 1–31 (2016)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yedid, G., Heier, L.: Effects of random and selective mass extinction on community composition in communities of digital organisms. In: Pontarotti, P. (ed.) Evolutionary Biology: Mechanisms and Trends, pp. 43–64. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yedid, G., Ofria, C.A., Lenski, R.E.: Historical and contingent factors affect re-evolution of a complex feature lost during mass extinction in communities of digital organisms. J. Evol. Biol. 21, 1335–1357 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wilke, C.O., Wang, J.L., Ofria, C., Lenski, R.E., Adami, C.: Evolution of digital organisms at high mutation rates leads to survival of the flattest. Nature 412, 215–218 (2010)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vickerstaff, R.J., DiPaolo, E.A.: Evolving neural models of path integration. J. Exp. Biol. 208, 3349–3366 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Price, T.D., Qvarnström, A., Irwin, D.E.: The role of phenotypic plasticity in driving genetic evolution. Proc. Roy. Soc. B 270(1523), 1433–1440 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Zoology, College of Life ScienceNanjing Agricultural UniversityNanjingChina
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceAligarh Muslim UniversityAligarhIndia

Personalised recommendations