Advertisement

Common Developmental Genomes Revisited – Evolution Through Adaptation

  • Konstantinos AntonakopoulosEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8602)

Abstract

Artificial development has been widely used for designing complex structures and as a means to increase the complexity of an artifact. One central challenge in artificial development is to understand how a mapping process could work on a class of architectures in a more general way by exploiting the most favorable properties from each computational architecture or by combining efficiently more than one computational architectures (i.e., a true multicellular approach). Computational architectures in this context comprise structures with connected computational elements, namely, cellular automata and boolean networks. The ability to develop and co-evolve different computational architectures has previously been investigated using common developmental genomes. In this paper, we extend a previous work that studied their evolvability. Here, we focus on their ability to evolve when the goal changes over evolutionary time (i.e., adaptation), utilizing a more fair fitness assignment scheme. In addition, we try to investigate how common developmental genomes exploit the underlying architecture in order to build the phenotypes. The results show that they are able to find very good solutions with rather simplified solutions than anticipated.

Keywords

Common developmental genomes Evolvability Cellular automata Boolean network L-systems 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bidlo, M., Vasicek, M.: Evolution of cellular automata with conditionally matching rules. In: Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC 2013), pp. 1178–1185 (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bull, L.: Artificial symbiogenesis and differing reproduction rates. Artificial Life 16(1), 65–72 (2010)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Antonakopoulos, K., Tufte, G.: On the Evolvability of Different Computational Architectures using a Common Developmental Genome. In: Rosa, A., Dourado, A., Madani, K., Filipe, J., Kacprzyk J. (eds.) IJCCI 2012, pp. 122–129. SciTePress Publishing (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Antonakopoulos, K., Tufte, G.: Is Common Developmental Genome a Panacea Towards More Complex Problems? In: 13th IEEE International Symposium on Computational Intelligence and Informatics (CINTI 2012), pp. 55–61 (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Antonakopoulos, K., Tufte, G.: A Common Genetic Representation Capable of Developing Distinct Computational Architectures. In: IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC 2011), pp. 1264–1271 (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tufte, G.: The discrete dynamics of developmental systems. In: IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC 2009), pp. 2209–2216 (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lindenmayer, A.: Developmental Systems without Cellular Interactions, their Languages and Grammars. Journal of Theoretical Biology 30(3), 455–484 (1971)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lindenmayer, A., Prusinkiewicz, P.: Developmental Models of Multicellular Organisms: A Computer Graphics Perspective. In: Langton, C.G. (ed.) Proceedings of ALife, pp. 221–249. Addison-Wesley Publishing (1989)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer and Information ScienceNorwegian University of Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations