Changeset 1229 for cpp/frams/genetics/f4/f4_oper.cpp

Timestamp:

04/30/23 02:11:46 (12 months ago)

Author:

Maciej Komosinski

Message:

• More strict parsing (reporting errors instead of implicit fixes)
• Simplified and optimized parsing of neuron class names
• Added a number of comments on parsing peculiarities

File:

• cpp/frams/genetics/f4/f4_oper.cpp (modified) (3 diffs)

cpp/frams/genetics/f4/f4_oper.cpp

@@ -16 +16 @@
 //
 // TODO the behavior of neuron input indexes during mutation seems badly implemented (see also TREAT_BAD_CONNECTIONS_AS_INVALID_GENO). Are they kept properly maintained when nodes are added and removed? This could be done well because during mutation we operate on the tree structure with cross-references between nodes (so they should not be affected by local changes in the tree), and then convert the tree back to string. Yet, the f4_Node.conn_from is an integer and these fields in nodes do not seem to be maintained on tree node adding/removal... change these integer offsets to references to node objects? But actually, do the offsets that constitute relative connection references concern the f4_Node tree structure (and all these sophisticated calculations of offsets during mutation are useful) or rather they concern the f4_Cells development? verify all situations in f4_Cell::oneStep(), case '['.
-// TODO add simplifying sequences of modifiers (so capital and small letter cancel out, like in f1) - but seems like each single modifier is a separate f4_Node? and perhaps we don't want to use the repair mechanism for this... maybe mutations, when they add/modify/remove a modifier node, should be "cleaning" the tree by removing nodes when they encounter contradictory modifiers on the same subpath?
+// TODO add simplifying sequences of modifiers (so capital and small letter cancel out, like in f1) - but seems like each single modifier is a separate f4_Node? and perhaps we don't want to use the repair mechanism for this... maybe mutations, when they add/modify/remove a modifier node, should be "cleaning" the tree by removing nodes when they encounter contradictory modifiers on the same subpath, and also limit the number of modifiers of each type just like in f1? To avoid squences like ...<X>llmlIilImmimiimmimifmfl<fifmmimilimmmiimiliffmfliIfififlliflimfliffififmiffmfliflifmIlimimiflimfiffmllliflmimifllifliliflifmIlimimiflimfiffmllliflmimifllfmIlimimiflimfiffmllliflmimiflliflimimmiflimfliffmiflifmfiffllIlififliffififmiffmfliflifIliflimimflimflfflimimifllfflifllfflimlififfiiffifIr<r<...
 // TODO add support for properties of (any class of) neurons - not just sigmoid/force/intertia (':' syntax) for N
 // TODO add mapping genotype character ranges for neural [connections]
@@ -120 +120 @@
 int Geno_f4::validate(char *& geno, const char *genoname)
 {
-        // convert geno to tree, then try to validate 20 times
+        // convert geno to a tree, then try to validate
         f4_Node root;
         if (f4_processRecur(geno, 0, &root) || root.childCount() != 1) return GENOPER_OK; // cannot repair
-        if (ValidateRec(&root, 20) == GENOPER_REPAIR) // if repaired, make it back to string
+
+        const int VALIDATE_TRIALS = 20;
+        if (ValidateRec(&root, VALIDATE_TRIALS) == GENOPER_REPAIR) // if repaired, make it back to string
         {
                 geno[0] = 0;
@@ -674 +676 @@
         if (f4_processRecur(g2, 0, &root2) || (root2.childCount() != 1)) return GENOPER_OPFAIL;
 
-        // decide amounts of crossover, 0.25-0.75
-        // adam: seems 0.1-0.9 -- MacKo
+        // decide amounts of crossover, 0.1-0.9
         chg1 = 0.1 + rndDouble(0.8);
         chg2 = 0.1 + rndDouble(0.8);