Quote: Original post by makar
adult: 'did you make this mess?'
child: 'yes'

*smack*

I'd just like to point out something:

The article is titles "robots evolve and learn how to lie" however it is about the evolutionary process of intelligence but not how we learn to lie (and do other cool stuff).

I'd like to propose the creation of a 'parent' robot, a robot that is incapable of learning but is programmed to be capable of survival in its environment. Would this help the development of a 'child' robot? A robot that is capable of using the sensors and limbs attached to it and has a desire to make choices that benefit itself most.

Perhaps.

In nature parents tend to force things upon their children for the child's benefit. In time the child learns to make its own decisions (with a little guidance of course).

Though it seems possible to recreate intelligence as it exists in nature I don't believe it is possible to code a program to make decisions based on events that have not yet been perceived.

Quote: Original post by fujitsu

Quote: Original post by makar
adult: 'did you make this mess?'
child: 'yes'

*smack*

I'd just like to point out something:

The article is titles "robots evolve and learn how to lie" however it is about the evolutionary process of intelligence but not how we learn to lie (and do other cool stuff).

I'd like to propose the creation of a 'parent' robot, a robot that is incapable of learning but is programmed to be capable of survival in its environment. Would this help the development of a 'child' robot? A robot that is capable of using the sensors and limbs attached to it and has a desire to make choices that benefit itself most.

Perhaps.

In nature parents tend to force things upon their children for the child's benefit. In time the child learns to make its own decisions (with a little guidance of course).

Though it seems possible to recreate intelligence as it exists in nature I don't believe it is possible to code a program to make decisions based on events that have not yet been perceived.

Along these lines, it has been found that humans had an explosion of culture around 10000 years ago. All of a sudden there was a rapid acceleration of knowledge and invention. Theories about this period include the idea that traits are passed down two ways: genetically and culturally. Genetic traits include physical traits and 'instinctual' reactions. Cultural traits is essentially knowledge taught.

This exercise may be more telling if parents did not die before children were spawned and that knowledge learned in one generation, stored in a 'memory bank' -- could be 'passed down' and taught to children (based on physical capacity to learn)...

It certainly wouldn't make sense if you were using genetic algorithms as a method to find optimal solutions ... but otherwise, it might be 'interesting'...

Thinking about this (less the usual reaction to such AI hype - "How many dim journalists does it take to anthromorphize something little more than a fancy lightswitch....") --- it came to mind to question how complex a world mechanism and possibilities for behavior is needed before you can start using it as a remote analogy of human level behavior ??


Cooperative behavior where units of similar genetics are seen as 'Us' and thus worthy of help (signaling them that food is here or equiv) and trying to fool/block the acquisition of that resource by 'The Others' (ones not sharing the same genes).

I suppose IDENTIFY_GENETIC_MATCH could be turned into a gene/set of genes that modiy behavior, but that seems so contrived because the GA system didnt create the mechanism from much simpler primitives itself.

Too many genes and you get into combinatoric chaos-land (millions of generations of a world of billions of units to grow behaviors that are not chaotic ineffectiveness).

Too few genes and your potential for complex behaviors are virtually nil.



I though of the above and of the old 'amino acid soup' theory of evolution, I wonder if anyone doing these experiments has noticed (if the mechanism is even possible) groupings of units coalescing to connect their behaviors.

An Idea would be to add a gene that allows connection to one or more other units to form super units -- whereby the limited behaviors of a GA gene system can group into a next order of organism (effectively the original units become 'super=genes' allowing much more complex behavior).
(Unfortunately this will be subject to the combinatorics effect unless some stability factor causes the unit mutation to slow down and the generational cycle to now be mostly at the higher order.)

Billions and billions ....