The genetic algorithm and its possible applications - page 8
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
If nature (god, universal mind) considers that mankind is a dead-end branch, then maybe))). And will begin to develop, for example the rat population, as more adapted to the negative factors of the environment. In this case I wonder how many millions of years it will take for rats to reach the same level as mankind. Will they ever be able to reach it?) Maybe other animals have a better chance of achieving it?
Biological life in general is a much more resilient entity than humans in particular, despite their Intelligence and technology. It will never be possible to destroy life as such by man, because as evolution has shown - life arises from matter under comfortable conditions and evolves towards more complex and self-conscious beings.
It is possible to destroy the current version of life on earth. But, - not the very possibility of its reproduction. Therefore, a man can only devour himself and the surrounding world, while nature will make a "restart" of evolutionary cycle from the simplest forms. For her it is common, for us it is perdition.
just google it.
The information is scarce and does not sound scientific. It is experiments conducted by enthusiasts.
A real system performing a complex task can be optimized by a GA, but not "developed" by adding parameters and functionality. If GA were AI - then formally - "an automatic system creates an automatic system automatically". But, the GA mechanism itself is too simple to add parameters and functionality to the system that would not break it, but improve it.
My opinion, of course...
The information is scarce and does not sound scientific. It is experiments conducted by enthusiasts.
A real system performing a complex task can be optimised by a GA, but not "developed" by adding parameters and functionality. If GA were AI - then formally - "an automatic system creates an automatic system automatically". But, the GA mechanism itself is too simple to build up the parameters and functionality of the system, which would not break it, but improve it.
My opinion, of course...
genes are made of dna, dna is made of proteins, proteins are made of amino acids. Cockroaches, giraffes, viruses and Olga Buzova all consist of the same amino acids, how is that possible? because the number of genes is different!!! how did nature create species with different number of genes then?
genes are made of dna, dna is made of proteins, proteins are made of amino acids. Cockroaches, giraffes, viruses and Olga Buzova all consist of the same amino acids. How could they have different numbers of genes!!! How did nature create species with different numbers of genes?
Simply assembling parameters (genes) into groups is one thing, but creating a fine-tuned system out of them is another.
Disabling a system parameter and the functionality based on it is easy, but adding a parameter with functionality to a working system without ruining it can only be done using intelligence, not blind GA. So far...
Nature uses its own mechanisms that we don't fully understand. One of them, for example, is natural selection. It is also an optimization, only biological, and its target function is survival.
Assembling complex and efficient systems by technology of selection, interbreeding and random mutations is highly questionable. I'm not sure that's enough... At least not if we don't have millions of years to spare, as Nature does.
I guess in our case, only AI can help.
Zy. For the sake of experiment, you can try to assemble systems from random parameters in a cycle of enumerating them and randomly "linking", gradually increasing their number and complexity. I don't know what the result will be...
Simply assembling parameters (genes) into groups is one thing, but making a well-functioning system out of them is another.
Disabling a system parameter and the functionality based on it is easy, but adding a parameter with functionality to a working system without spoiling it can only be done using intelligence, not blind GA. So far...
Nature uses its own mechanisms that we don't fully understand. One of them, for example, is natural selection. It is also an optimization, only biological, and its target function is survival.
Assembling complex and efficient systems by technology of selection, interbreeding and random mutations is highly questionable. I'm not sure that's enough... At least not if we don't have millions of years to spare, as Nature does.
I guess in our case, only AI can help.
Zy. For the sake of experiment, you can try to assemble systems from random parameters in a cycle of enumerating them and randomly "linking", gradually increasing their number and complexity. I don't know what the result will be...
I'm not going to argue, you think it's impossible, I think and have enough reasons to think so - it's possible.
I won't argue, you think it's impossible, I think and have enough reason to think it's possible.
I will not argue, you think it is impossible, I think and have enough reason to think so - it is possible.
Maybe as a collective society we could try it ??? :)
Why don't they do it then? They are not idiots, are they?
Probably because MT is not a specialised software for research and all the capabilities of GA, etc., maybe they just didn't think about it, there are a lot of development areas, you can't keep up with them all.
The main thing is the right direction, so we need to show GA that it has shown the worst result here, not just a weak one.
I adjusted OnTester() to show the worst result in case there are few trades performed by EA, your tip seems to work
Thank you!
I'm not going to argue, you think it's impossible, I think and have enough reason to think it's possible.