shminux comments on Automatic programming, an example - Less Wrong

12 Post author: Thomas 01 February 2012 08:55PM

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

Comments (32)

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

Comment author: wmorgan 01 February 2012 10:13:40PM *  4 points [-]

Very interesting demonstration. Thanks for sharing this; it was fun to read through! I think I have a pretty good idea of how it works.

As a professional programmer:

That code it generated...is really, really shitty. It's unreadable, and for that reason, a human cannot look at the generated code and figure out "what's going on," i.e. Kepler's laws. Insofar as it works, it's much more reminiscent of 0x5f3759df, but that algorithm was optimizing for speed, not correctness or elegance.

I'm not surprised that the algorithm does worse on the control group, for the same reason that I'd question the assumption that it will do better on future generations. It could easily be over-fitting, partially because there is no selection pressure for an elegant solution. Empirically, elegant code does better in novel contexts.

Comment author: shminux 02 February 2012 01:23:27AM 3 points [-]

"Evolution is dumb, but it works" -- I believe that showing that was the (implicit) goal, and it was amply demonstrated.