Quote: Original post by me22

Quote: Original post by Electrovolt
One aspect of it is based on the observation that ants always manage to find the shortest path to a food source from their nest. Apparently ants drop pheromones as they walk along, which can then be sensed by other ants. On return from the food source, an ant will follow the path with the most pheromones back. The shortest path very soon becomes apparent as it becomes populated with the most pheromones.

http://david.gordon.name/projects/Ant-based%20Pathfinding.pdf -- Fairly interesting read, for an honours project :P

Made me think about using the pheremones idea to make an influence map for an RTS AI in a sort of weird pheremone/breadcrumb/flocking hybrid.

This discussion reminds me of a book I read by Michael Crichton (sp?) (of "Jurassic Park" and "ER" fame) called "Prey". The plot of the book is a bunch of nanites are bred with artificial intelligence and then escape from the lab (typical!!). Very interesting...and hard to kill the swarm since they are molecular in size. Bullets just go right through the swarm.

Quote: Original post by owl
The other day I was sitting in the bathroom (don't laught) looking at the floor and then I saw a little red ant there.

My first impulse was to kill it, but, as I was going expend some more minutes with my bussines I decided to do an experiment, which I'll describe next:

I took the champoo and draw a circle (of about 4cm) around the ant, letting it locked up inside with the intetion of seeing how the ant would react to this.

The ant began to follow the wall of champoo, apparently looking for a way out, going back and fort the exact center of the circle and staying there a while, like if it was deciding where to try next.

It did three attempts to walk over the wall without success, it sank into it and slid inside again. Then it started to follow the wall again (kind of desperately).

At the end it went to the center of the circle again and remained a few seconds there, then it walked directly into the wall of champu (this time underneath it) and, half walking, half swimming, it succeded to pass trough.

I must confess that I did not expect the ant to be able to find a way to get out there. I belived ants where more like an instinct based automat than an intelligent animal.

Conclusion: The ant was served with a problem, it tryied several (kind of ingenious) ways of getting out of there, and it did it. The ant solved the problem.

Epiloge: Of course, I respect intelligence very much and for that reason I let the little ant continue it's way and live.

Now I have an anthill in the kitchen.

If it fits, I would like to hear your thougts about this and animal intelligence in general.

I am not sure which is more fascinating, the ant or the fact that you thought to sit and watch what it would do by performing an impromptu experiment! :)

Quote: Original post by ketek
You should elaborate a bit on yourself, if your first impulse was to kill,

The bathroom is close to my daughters bedroom. I do not want bugs walking over my progenie while they sleep.

And I did not kill the creature after all.

They made an anthill inside my house. Following your reasoning I should move somewhere else.

grow up.

Quote: Original post by Electrovolt
Good post. Ants are very interesting little creatures. I wish I new exactly how he escaped.

BTW, owl, don't know if you are aware of Ant Colony Optimization? You might find it interesting.

One aspect of it is based on the observation that ants always manage to find the shortest path to a food source from their nest. Apparently ants drop pheromones as they walk along, which can then be sensed by other ants. On return from the food source, an ant will follow the path with the most pheromones back. The shortest path very soon becomes apparent as it becomes populated with the most pheromones.

Unfortunately I don't have a link to a site for you, I learned it at varsity a few years, but I'm sure you can dig it up through google.

Yes the pheromone stuff is pretty neat. I wonder if it is related to the classic smeel of ants, I guess it does.

What shocks me the most is how the hell experiences get stored into DNA. I'm trying to elavorate a model for genetic evolution (not the real one, just one that may work) and I can imagine an agent that registers the physical state of creature and generates sperm/ovule with a modified DNA. But I can't imagine one that is able to sintetize a whole (timed) experience. Shocking.

Um, I don't think there has ever been any evidence for genetic memory outside of science fiction. At best, the genes that in some way cause behaviors which result in survival will be passed on to the next generation, while the carriers of genes that result in poor behaviors will not survive and thus those genes are less likely to survive.

There is no mechanism for recording and storing experiences in DNA.

Quote: Original post by Tom Knowlton
This discussion reminds me of a book I read by Michael Crichton (sp?) (of "Jurassic Park" and "ER" fame) called "Prey". The plot of the book is a bunch of nanites are bred with artificial intelligence and then escape from the lab (typical!!). Very interesting...and hard to kill the swarm since they are molecular in size. Bullets just go right through the swarm.

Souldn't be too hard. Flamethrower, magnetic field, gamma radiation, wind, ...

Quote: Original post by Anonymous Poster
There is no mechanism for recording and storing experiences in DNA.

Well, hunting strategies, ants farming, mating strategies must come from experience.

Quote: Original post by etothex
41 6C 6C 20 79 6F 75 20 6E 65 65 64 20 69 6E 20 74 68 69 73 20 6C 69 66 65 20 69 73 20 69 67 6E 6F 72 61 6E 63 65 20 61 6E 64 20 63 6F 6E 66 69 64 65 6E 63 65 3B 20 74 68 65 6E 20 73 75 63 63 65 73 73 20 69 73 20 73 75 72 65 2E

49 27 6d 20 6f 62 76 69 6f 75 73 6c 79 20 6a 75 73 74 20 74 6f 6f 20 73 6d 61 72 74 20 66 6f 72 20 6d 79 20 6f 77 6e 20 67 6f 6f 64

Quote: Reactive systems are a powerful way to simply solve complex problems.

But their biggest flaw is that they can make no guarantees about the global optimality of action, only the local optimality. So, a reactive agent controlling a robot might see it as sensible to go down a ramp to avoid the human charging toward them, but would then find that they cannot proceed down the hall to their goal because they can't get up the ramp again.

This is why the most successful systems are typically hybrid, based on heirarchical control.


Owl: I would contend that indeed DNA does encode experience and knowledge; the experience and knowledge of a species. However, DNA is only meaningful in the context in which the genotype is expressed. That is, the phenotype is domain dependent, which makes sense, because the phenotype is the expression of the knowledge and experience contained in the DNA and knowledge is always dependent on the context in which is was generated and later expressed. Obviously, we're not talking about knowledge such as 'red cars go faster', however knowledge such
as 'red berries are deadly' can be encoded through a physiologically negative reaction to seeing small, red, roundish objects. In much the same way, an ants DNA would encode the set of reactions it could produce when identifying an object blocking its path (turn left, turn right, go straight). Clearly, in the case of the OPs ant, the first two options failed. Given one option left, the ant took it. It doesn't require intelligence to achieve that result, only trial and error analysis.


Cheers,

Timkin

These are very interesting observations you've made about the ant.

I don't claim to know anything about insect behaviour, other than some bite or sting.

This past summer though, to overcome a fear of wasps, I lined up a Pepsi, A&W Rootbeer and a Coors Light along a window ledge and waited.

The wasps never tried to gain entrance to the house, though there was nothing physically stopping them.

They all went straight for the A&W Rootbeer, no questions asked. That cannot possibly be fully instinctual.

Plus, they wiggle their bums when they eat. It's comical.

Quote: Original post by Timkin
Obviously, we're not talking about knowledge such as 'red cars go faster', however knowledge such as 'red berries are deadly' can be encoded through a physiologically negative reaction to seeing small, red, roundish objects.

Yes we are not talking about that, at least not yet. The "red berries" example is a simple way to express what we are talking about. Another not so simple examples are, for example: group hunting, where each member of the group has to do something particular to get the prey. Complex bird-nest building (see "hornero" in google images), trap building, or mating "rituals" before sexual activities. These examples are "complex" procedures that require multiple steps to be accomplished.

The question I'm asking myself is: Is there some sort of functionality that "records" (in order) sucesive (chemical, neuronal, muscular) states of a creature in function of some other state such as enegetic level of cells or healt?

Does the fact pursuing a zebra first to the left, then to the right, then sourounding it, jumping over it and biting it's neck (which we will take as an optimal hunting strategy) gets recorded, submited to analysis/comparision with other experiences, encoded and stored into DNA after being qualified as a good way of getting food?

Does the fact of being similar to a leaf or a flower gets analysed and choosen (somehow) as a good way of avoiding death, atracting a pray or a mate?

Quote: Original post by Timkin
In much the same way, an ants DNA would encode the set of reactions it could produce when identifying an object blocking its path (turn left, turn right, go straight). Clearly, in the case of the OPs ant, the first two options failed. Given one option left, the ant took it. It doesn't require intelligence to achieve that result, only trial and error analysis.

The ant located the center of the "barricade", then proceded to follow it looking for some clear area to walk on. It did not find it, then returned to the center, then procceded to walk over the obstacle and failed three times. It did all this that alternately. Probably after "tasting" the champoo the ant noticed that even when it wasn't very pleasurable, it wasn't much nocive and then it decided to go trough it.

I'm not saying the ant is intelligent as a human. But it took it's chances intelligently. It could have been following the obstacle forever, like some rats do with their cage-wheel, thinking they are going somewhere because they are moving forward.

EDIT: typos

[Edited by - owl on November 24, 2005 5:13:20 PM]