Viliam comments on Open thread, Jul. 11 - Jul. 17, 2016 - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (131)
Evolution. Schedules are competing for being there. Every second 10000 or so are born and are mostly killed by the control program which let live only the top schedules according to the 30+ criteria set in the script.
Random (but perhaps clever) mutation and non-random selection, that's under the hood.
At first, the top schedule is a random one and not feasible at all. After a million (or a billion, that depends) generations the first feasible one appears and from there on, evolution produces more and more perfect schedules.
For every processor core, at least one evolution is going on. Each at least slightly different one. The program can spread across many computers and there may be as many as 100 or more parallel evolutions going on. They talk occasionally (via internet) and exchange their champions.
It has been 10 years long real life experiment, which went very well. A lot of schools involved, teachers and students and some academic papers published. Now it's time to spread it.
Does the solution space support this? I can imagine a schedule that only violates 1 criterium, but the nearest correct solution is far away from it. (Seems to me the schedules are similar to 3-SAT in this aspect.)
This is indeed a big and fundamental problem. If 1 criterium only is violated and this persists for many millions of generations, the control program sees this semi-solution as worse and worse. Much worse than a 2 or 4 criteriums miss. So it's then killed.
It's even more complicated than that. Several such tricks are employed and this problem almost vanishes.