prase comments on Prisoner's Dilemma Tournament Results - Less Wrong

101 Post author: prase 06 September 2011 12:46AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (170)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: shokwave 07 September 2011 12:36:43AM *  13 points [-]

The tournament models natural selection, but no changes and therefore evolution occurs.

Idea: everyone has access to a constant 'm', which they can use in their bot's code however they like. m is set by the botwriter's initial conditions, then when a bot has offspring in the natural selection tournament, one-third of the offspring have their m incremented by 1, one-third have theirs decremented by 1, and one third has their m remain the same. In this manner, you may plug m into any formulas you want to mutate over time.

Comment author: prase 07 September 2011 10:03:52AM *  5 points [-]

In the first PD simulation I made with five strategies which I got from my friends I applied such a model, albeit with random mutations rather than division of descendants into thirds. The results were not as interesting as I had expected. Only one strategy showed non-trivial optimum (it was basically TfT but defect after turn n and the population made a sort of gaussian distribution around n=85). All other strategies ended up with extremal (and quite obvious) values of the parameter.

Comment author: lessdazed 07 September 2011 10:18:13AM 7 points [-]

gaussian distribution around n=85

This is the pearl of interestingness.

Comment author: prase 07 September 2011 10:31:45AM *  4 points [-]

If you are interested in that tournament, the graphs are here, you can use google translator to make some sense of the text.