--- On Tue, 7/1/08, John G. Rose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > BUT there are some > circuits I believe, can't think of any offhand, where > the opposite is true. > It just kind of works based on based on complex subsystems > interoperational > functionality and it was discovered, not designed > intentionally.
Perhaps you are thinking of this: http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=870 The story of a guy who evolved FPGA's to detect specific audio tones. After 4000 generations, his simple 10 by 10 array of logic gates could perfectly discriminate the tones. But the best part, from the article: "Dr. Thompson peered inside his perfect offspring to gain insight into its methods, but what he found inside was baffling. The plucky chip was utilizing only thirty-seven of its one hundred logic gates, and most of them were arranged in a curious collection of feedback loops. Five individual logic cells were functionally disconnected from the rest– with no pathways that would allow them to influence the output– yet when the researcher disabled any one of them the chip lost its ability to discriminate the tones. Furthermore, the final program did not work reliably when it was loaded onto other FPGAs of the same type." Turns out the evolutionary process incorporated electromagnetic field effects unique to that particular FPGA chip. I love this story because it illustrates perfectly what I've been saying about the limitations of design versus the creativity of the evolved approach. Terren ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=106510220-47b225 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
