Date: Wed, 29 May 1996 09:30:33 EDT From: Jeremy D Selengut To: frc@nvg.unit.no Cc: selengut@MIT.EDU Subject: Final Round Summary Round: 57 Theme: (The Evolution of) Artificial Life Judge: Jeremy Wizards: Jeremy, Ronald, Morendil Round Begun: Mon, 13 May 96 16:51:57 +0100 ##### FINAL STATUS: Player Rules(V/I) Style Eligibility until ^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ "sharkey 2 (2/0) 0.0 Wed, 29 May 19:22 Stein 1 (1/0) +0.5 *ineligible* Waggie 4 (2/2) +3.0 *ineligible* Jesse 2 (1/1) +2.0 *ineligible* 0 (0/0) 0.0 *ineligible* Wiz-Ronald 2 (1/1) 0.0 *ineligible* Wiz-Morendil 1 (0/1) -1.0 *ineligible* Andre 1 (0/1) +0.5 *ineligible* Vanyel 2 (0/2) +1.5 *ineligible* TOTALS: 15 (7/8) +6.5 (+0.43/rule) +1 unsuccessful Congrats to our new Judge, "sharkey and wizard-Waggie. ##### TEMPORARY R.O. OVERRIDES: Proposal TO-1: ##### For the duration of round 57, R.O. #4 shall include the following text: Solely for the purposes of determining the timing of all game actions, weekends are not considered to exist. Any action taken on a weekend will be considered to have been taken during the first seconds of the following Monday. The order in which actions are taken on weekends will be preserved by the Judge by adding single seconds onto the official time attributed to those actions on that Monday. ##### Received: Mon, 13 May 1996 16:40:37 +0100 FOR: Jeremy, Ronald, Anton AGA: Andre Proposal PASSING Proposal voting ends Thu, 16 May 1996 16:40:37 +0100 Proposal TO-2 ##### For the duration of round 57, R.O. #4 shall include the following text: Solely for the purposes of determining the timing of all game actions, Monday, May 20th and Tuesday May 21st, 1996 will be considered part of the preceding weekend. For the purposes of determining the proper order of events which take place during this long weekend, Wednesday May 22nd will be treated as if it was the Monday following a normal weekend as provided for in TO-1. ##### Received: Tue, 14 May 1996 23:01:26 +0100 FOR: Jeremy, Anton, Ronald, Waggie AGA: Proposal passing Proposal voting ends Fri, 17 May 1996 23:01 THE RULES: ********** 57:1 Ronald VALID +0.5 Style Recieved: Mon, 13 May 96 16:51:57 +0100 >>>>> In this round every letter in the alphabet will represent a different species. There are five laws that gouvern the evolution of these species. In the beginning the Judge created the world and it contained only one species: X >>>>> Judgement: No problems. Style: Flattery will get you nowhere, still only gets 0.5 style for a routine first rule... (The 0.5 is for starting off the round so punctually, thanks!) ********** 57:2 "sharkey VALID -0.5 Style Recieved: Mon 13 May 96 19:22:26 >>>> After the beginning, the Judge saw that the world was boring with only one species, so he took a leg from the first in order to create a second species: X Y And it was also decreed to avoid premature extinctions, that any rule which limits the length of the round to a finite number of valid rules, shall be declared invalid. >>>> Judgement: The wording of the first part of this is sloppy, the phrase leading up to the colon could imply that the second species is "X Y" which would violate 56:1. I will extend the benefit of the doubt and assume the new species is in fact "Y". Style: The Judge was bored with the single-species world...and this rule too! ********** 57:3 Dug UNSUCCESSFUL Received: Mon 13 May 96 19:38:01 >>> The First Law of Evolution MUTATION: "Any new species may be created out of a currently surviving species, but only if it is physically adjacent on a standard QWERTY keyboard." Species and the letters which represent them will be considered equivalent. So to avoid confusion, rules must not contain any letters representing currently surviving species. And on the second day, the Judge created the species Z. And it was good. >>> Judgement: I'll take Dug's word for it that he had not received "sharkey's rule before he sent out this one. Style: No style awards for unsuccessful rules, and lucky, too. I hate the idea of either lots of letter restrictions or very few species. ********** 57:4 Waggie INVALID +1.5 Style Received: Mon 13 May 96 20:07:45 +0100 ------------------------------------------------------------------ The Food Web. It's very nice for species to evolve, but in order to survive they have to eat... other species. Any species can only eat the species represented by letters below its on a QWERTY keyboard... that is, Q W E R T Y U I O P A S D F G H J K L Z X C V B N M Any species on the top or middle row must have at least one species which it can eat. So unfortunately for the Y species, it evolved too early since none of its food species (G,H,V,B,N) existed yet, and the Y species became extinct because of starvation. One of the Rules of Evolution is that "you can't eat your cousins": if Species 1 evolves into Species 2 then it is not possible for Species 1 to eat Species 2, and it is not possible for Species 2 to eat Species 1. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Judgement: Unfortunately the species "Y" did not evolve, it was created. Style: I LOVE this rule and hate to invalidate it on such a trivial error. +2 for the concept, -0.5 for the slip-up. ********** 57:5 Waggie VALID +0 Style Received: Tue, 14 May 1996 01:06:33 +0100 ------------------------------------------------------------ Genetic Diversity. >From now on each valid rule must give an accurate account of the current population of each species, taking into account all known and relevant aspects of the theory of population dynamics and the ecosystem, as well as evolution and Acts of Judge. The population of every species doubles from one valid rule to the next. The theories of population dynamics and evolution are applied within the valid rules. At the time of Creation there was 1 smoot of species X. (The "smoot" is the universal and indivisible unit of population.) In 57:2 the Judge turned 1 smoot of X into a smoot of Y. At the beginning of 57:5 there were 2 smoots of X and 2 smoots of Y. One of the Rules of Evolution is Genetic Diversity: if there are at least 2 smoots of species @, and at least 1/4 of the total population of the world is of species @, then 1/2 of the smoots of @ (rounded down) evolve into smoots of a different species $. (In 57:2 I guess the Judge got to that smoot of X before it had a chance to evolve!) In accordance with Genetic Diversity, the following evolutions take place during this rule: X --> U and Y --> M. Now the population of the world is: Species: X Y U M Smoots: 1 1 1 1 -------------------------------------------------------------- Judgement: Although Ronald quibbles that X was not turned into Y (only a leg thereof) in 57:2 (which would yield a counting of 1 X, 1 pegleg X and 1 Y), an equally consistent interpretation (and one more in tune with the divine character of the Judge-Creator) is that the Judge "took" the leg (who knows where e took it to) leaving one of the X's looking like: \/ / , which, when it healed up became the new species, Y. I think Ronald took the allegory with Adam's rib a little too closely. Style: Definitely too long, but right on theme which cancels out to zippo. Yes, I got the homage to MIT's famous measure, Mr. Smoot, but I'm not that fond of MIT anyway, so no brown nose style points here. ********** 57:6 Vanyel INVALID +0.5 Style Tue, 14 May 1996 08:59:14 +0100 >>>>> Convergent Evolution If two species have both existed within two consecutive valid rules, and if the capital roman letters which represent them differ only by the existence of a single line segment, then convergent evolution occurs. The species which possesses that line segment loses it, and its population combines with the other species. Thus, after the prior rule, the following evolutions occur: M -> P, U -> V, X -> I, Y -> T, X -> Y. The populations are as follows: I M P T U V Y 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 Every future Rule will specify a law which governs the artificial life. >>>>> Judgement: Species X and Y have existed within two consecutive rules: 57:2 and 57:5, yet they did not converge during 57:5. Now they have existed within two consecutive rules again: 57:5 and 57:6 and this time they do converge. Clearly inconsistent. Style: A nice, thematic idea. I did not look forward to the inevitable arguments over fonts and line segments, however. A little off for using two consecfutive rules instead of three. ********** 57:7 Jesse VALID +1.0 Style Received: Tue, 14 May 1996 19:48:39 +0100 >>>>> Habitat and the First Extinctions. All creatures need suitable habitat to survive. Those creatures without sufficient habitat die prior to the application of any rule of evolution. In the early days, there was no habitat in the world but Void, which was suitable for only those created to live in the Void by the Judge, the X and the Y. Consequently, the 2 smoots of U and the 2 smoots of M died tragically of aespixelation at the beginning of this rule. On a happy note, these four smoots of dead creatures condensed to form the habitat of Earth, suitable for mutated offspring of the X and the Y (and also, incidentally, the beginnings of the oil deposits which were to cause so much trouble later on). Following mutation in accordance with Genetic Diversity, the population of the world became: Species: X Y W R Smoots: 1 1 1 1 >>>>> Judgement: No Problems. Style: Long. Doesn't change the game state, really. So that was the bad news first. The good news: quite stylish - begins to create a type of creation myth; somewhere between the Silmarillion and The Voyage of the Beagle. Xtra points for "aespixelation." ********** 57:8 Stein VALID +0.5 Style Received: Wed, 15 May 1996 11:58:49 +0100 >>>> Species diversify in alphabetical order, thus the created species X, Y, and later on the infamous Z (but that is another story) diversify last. However, whereas the created species can diversify without eating, the others can not. So after obligatory multiplying, if they must diversify they must eat. To eat, the two recently multiplied smoots feast on one smoot of a species who appears later on in a the alphabet. Smoots unable to eat starve to death (unless they die from asepix .. apsix .. axpis ... oh well, something other first). What's more: While X'es and Y's can genetically diversify into any non-extinct evolved species, the evolved species' genetic diversification depend on what they have eaten. Example: At the beginning of this rule there were 2 each of X, Y, W and R. The R's ate one smoot of X which makes the species diversify into its succeeding alphebetical letter species, turning one smoot of R into S. The W's could not of course eat the other X, as evolving into a created species is impossible (not to mention that this would render X extinct - something the noble W's would never do, the lowly A's to come perhaps, but never the W's). So they ate one smoot of Y which makes the species diversify into its preceeding alphebetical letter species, turning one smoot of W into V. And then there were one smoot each of Y X W V S R: >>>> Judgement: Complex but, for the moment, I cannot find anything wrong with it. Style: Complex and LONG. A lot which might trip up someone in future rules here. Eating is a natural concept for the round, and I like the preservation of the semi-divine nature of the X and Y species. ********* 57:9 Waggie VALID +0 Style Received: Wed, 15 May 1996 16:15:24 +0100 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Taxonomy One of the three accepted taxonomic systems (a division of all possible species into at most three groups) is Primordial: X Y Articulate: A B E F G H K P Q R T Inarticulate: C D I J L M N O S U V W Z In order to keep evolutionary science on a sound footing, laws of nature introduced in subsequent rules must either apply equally to all species, or distinguish between species based on one and only one accepted taxonomic system, or based on alphabetical order, and may not distinguish between species in any other way or combination of ways. At the beginning of this rule the population of the world was: 2 X, 2 Y, 2 R, 2 S, 2 V, 2 W, (smoots, of course). Nothing extraordinary happened this epoch. Seems to be flourishing! ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Judgement (initial): Unfortunately 57:7 states that the only habitats presently around are Void and Earth. Void is only suitable for X and Y, and Earth is only suitable for the mutated offspring of X and Y. V and S are the offspring of W and R, so they should have died of aespixelation at the beginning of this rule (unless you wrote in some other reason why that shouldn't have happened). Re-Judgement: I bow to the will of the people and reverse my Judgement of 57:9 to VALID. I was well aware of the weakness of my position when I stated it. I would have preferred to hew to the stricter interpretations of suitability and/or offspring, but when you're going to lose a vote anyway, what's the point of standing on principle? Style: short, yes, but overly complicated. Re-judgment of Style: As for my Style critique of the rule as complicated, what I meant was that the grammatical/logical structure of the restriction was complicated. It reads, in schematic (LISP) form, as: (Rules must (apply to species equally) OR (distinguish based on ((one taxonomic system) OR (alphabetical order)) AND NOT (in any other (way) OR (combination of ways)))) Ooops, did I slip into Artificial Intelligence? That's the theme for NEXT round... ********** 57:10 Wizard-Morendil INVALID -1.0 Style Received: Thu, 16 May 1996 03:01:35 +0100 ---[Begin Rule]--- Survival of the Fittest Completing the Edifice which comprises the Law of Genetic Diversity, the Law of Alphabetical Speciation, the Law of Habitats and the Law of Equal Opportunities, Survival of the Fittest is the last - but not the least - of the Laws of Evolution. As everyone knows, differential survival of species is the main force for adaptative evolution - the process whereby species come to dominate an ecosystem if they are best adapted to that ecosystem. For Fantasy Species, an ecosystem equates to a valid Rule - it consists of the letters which make up the usual nickname of that Rule's author, or eir first name if e doesn't have a nickname. Whenever three evolved species or more coexist on Earth, at least one of the evolved species represented by a letter of the ecosystem goes extinct. In MORENDIL, poor R didn't make the grade : X Y S V W Species 4 4 4 4 4 Smoots ---[End Rule]--- Judgement: 1) Inconsistent with 57:9. This law of nature does not apply equally to all species, differentially based on the PAI taxonomy, nor based on alphabetical order. Therefore, it must differentiate based on one of the two remaining accepted taxonomic systems (which are required to contain no more than three groups). This law differentiates the species into N+1 groups where N is the number of rule-authors. 2) Inconsistent with 57:7. First sentence implies that the Law of Habitats (i.e. the first sentence of 57:7) is a Law of Evolution. However, it clearly states that this effect takes place *prior* to the application of any rule of evolution, i.e. the Law of Habitats is not a Law of Evolution. Style: Listen, folks, grammar is important. The first sentence of this rule is unparsable, nonsensical goblety-gook. Is it inconsistent with itself or anything else? Who knows. More likely the number of ways it could be consistently interpreted are legion. I know M. is going to come back & say: "I forgot a semi-colon, see, it clearly means" such and such, but as it stands I cannot make sense of it and that is what matters. (I mean, I think I can see what was intended, but that is irrelevant...) By trying to define everything that has gone before as one of the five laws of evolution this would have stunted the round unnecessarily. ************* 57:11 "sharkey VALID +0.5 Style Received: Thu, 16 May 1996 19:22:44 +0100 >>>>>>> The Law of Cross-Pollination Smoots of two different species may combine (or mate) to form a third species. The species formed is determined by ceasar-cipher-addition. (In which, if the letters A-Z are represented by 0-25, The sum of two letters is the sum of their numerical equivalents modulo 26.) Species may not mate if the mating would cause the extinction of their own species. The newly formed species may not be one which was already currently alive. During this rule, 1 smoot of R and 1 smoot of S combine to form 1 smoot of J. Also another smoot of R and a smoot of V combine to form 1 smoot of M. J and M find that Earth is a suitable habitat for them as well. It seems that they have inherited their parents' ability to live there. At least one mating will occur in each rule from now on. Species: X Y W R S V J M Smoots: 4 4 4 2 3 3 1 1 >>>>>>> Judgement: No Problems. Style: On theme, but calling this type of transformation "mating" or "cross-pollination" is quite strange. Perhaps "coalescence" might have been a better name. ************* 57:12 Vanyel INVALID +1.0 Style Received: Fri, 17 May 1996 12:15:37 +0100 >>>>> Soon the various species (especially the lower species) discovered that they verily enjoyed mating. One smoot of J mated with R, and begot an A, and smoots of M and S begat the first E. Among the higher species, only V and Y mated, begetting a T. At that time, the species of the world were many and varied, with 1 A, 1 E, 1 J, 1 M, 3 R, 5 S, 1 T, 5 V, 8 W, 8 X, and 7 Y. The Judge became angry with the wanton behaviour of the evolutionary descendants of his creations. Jdg spaketh: "Woe be to those who mate wantonly, and their children, and their children's children unto all generations!" And thus it was that He decided to send a deluge unto the Earth. But He took pity upon some of His species. Unto them saith He: "R and S, you have not decimated your numbers from Cross-Pollination, so I shall grant you respite. Unto you I grant the ability to fly, which enables you to traverse the Habitat of Air. V and W, you have not been mating excessively and so unto you and all your descendants I grant the ability to swim in the Habitat of Water." Then unto the Earth the Judge released a terrible flood, which completely covered the Earth. Some of the species were able to move into other habitats, but some were destroyed by the Deluge. After that time there was never again a species which was restricted to the Earthen Habitat, and all species had access to exactly one of the three Habitats other than Earth. >>>>> Judgement: Sorry Vanyel, I agree with those who think this rule must fulfill 57:5 by stating the population of the world *after* all aspects of population dynamics, ecosystem, evolution and acts of Judge are taken into account which are known "currently." You argue that you do give a current accounting, one from before the act of Judge described here (the Flood), this in itself is not inconsistent with anything but, by the end of the rule, the "known and relevant aspects" of the above forces have become current and must be accounted for. Now, if you'd made the Flood an act of some other entity besides the Judge you might have gotten away with it... Style: Long, but stylishly biblical - would have gotten us much of the way through the FRC-version of Genesis. ************* 57:13 Andre INVALID +0.5 Received: Wed, 22 May 1996 13:59:07 +0100 As is well known, evolution has no road back. If something has evolved, it cannot be de-evolved. Therefore the following rule: A species cannot evolve in any way (including mating) into a species from which is one of its forefathers (that is, its parent or parents, their parents, etcetera). Even though they have just come into existence through mating, the J and M species start mating themselves immediately - no 'adults only' around here... One of the J mates with one of the R, forming a B. One of the M mates with a V, forming an I. And as I look elsewhere, an X and an R work together to form a P. And there you have it! The number of species now reaches 11, too many to survive on our virtual planet. If the number ever reaches higher than 10, 1 Smoot of each species dies because of overpopulation, except for those species that evolved in the current rule. After one round of death, the J and M species become extinct, and the number of species is back to 9, with these numbers of Smoots: Species: B I P R S V W X Y Smoots: 1 1 1 1 5 4 7 6 7 ----------- Judgement: Violates 57:11. Sorry, Andre, you've got the cipher wrong: J(9) + R(17) = 26 MOD 26 = A(0), etc... Style: an OK rule, besides the math blunder, except calling this restriction "overpopulation" when smoots are the measure of population seems inappropriate. The maximum number of species in the world might better have been named with reference to the environment or environmental niches. {NOTE: there's nothing wrong with resubmission with corrected math, although the style award may be poor, but be advised that my silence on the issue of restriction to a finite number of rules (57:2) is not indicative of any judicial opinion yea or nay.} ************* 57:14 Waggie INVALID +1.5 Received: Thu, 23 May 1996 16:38:34 +0100 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To each species is associated a description of at most two lines explaining its unique features in the world; this description is not a general law of nature. Until otherwise specified, each such description is empty, but once a nonempty description has been associated with a species that description can not be changed. For example, the description of A is changed to: A: Can live in Earth or Sea, but not Sky or Void. Each A smoot eats four smoots which are from the same Primordial or Inarticulate species. During each rule, for each species, each smoot of that species must satisfy the conditions of the species' description if at all possible, or else die. The conditions imposed by these descriptions are applied in alphabetical order of species, before evolutionary processes. During this rule the crossfertilization 1R + 1J --> 1A occurred. (Uh oh! There's a snake in the garden...) Species: A J M R S V W X Y Smoots: 1 1 2 3 6 6 8 8 8 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Judgement: My problem with this rule is minor, but I cannot in good faith ignore the logic of it. Invalid due to internal inconsistency: Waggie assigns a null-description to each species for the moment, however he also requires that each description must "explain[...] its unique features in the world." If he had left the initial assignment of the descriptions until future rules it would have been OK, but the formality of his logic prohibits me from concluding that an "empty" description is identical to not yet having a description. As it stands these "empty" descriptions are required to explain some unique features and, failing that, invalidate this rule. Style: Quite nice, we needed a predator, as well as a way to differentiate each of the species from the other in some descriptive way. I find this type of differentiation is unambiguously OK with respect to 57:9 - nicely done. NOTE: As I can use any criterion to judge style, I think I can fairly promise that this rule, which I like alot, will only be penalized -0.5 style points if it is resubmitted and found valid the second time around. ************* 57:15 Ronald INVALID -0.5 Style Received: Fri, 24 May 1996 10:02:53 +0100 >>>>>> Judge saw appear on his computer screen, where a program ran that kept track of all species X=8 Y=8 W=8 V=6 R=4 S=6 J=2 M=2 doubling X=8 Y=8 W=8 V=6 R=3 S=5 J=3 M=2 R and S into J X=8 Y=8 W=8 V=5 R=2 S=5 J=3 M=3 R and V into M and he yawned...... For the last time in this Epoch Judge created a species. It was the ultimate predator, the Tyrannosaurus Rex of its Universe, it was the Z! Judge put 1 smoot of Z in each of the Three Habitats that existed (Void, Earth and Internet) and proclaimed that each smoot of Z will eat at least 2 smoots each Rule. The Z's that find not enough to eat, will die. 1 smoot had nothing to eat, but the other two immediately gobbled up a smoot of X, one of Y, one of W and one of R, leaving us with X=7 Y=7 W=7 V=5 R=1 S=5 J=3 M=3 >>>>>> Judgement: The final accounting of the population omits the Z species. Ronald argues that 57:5 (1st sentence) only requires _an_ accurate, current accounting and he has given three, the last one is gravy. The interpretation I must make is on the meaning of the word "current" in 57:5. One interpretation is that time progresses through a rule, each section of it existing at a separate "current" timepoint. On the other hand, one could hold that, as rules are judged, each in it's turn, only after each is submitted, "current" refers to the state of the world at the end of each rule. It appears to me that such a dogmatic, uniform classification is not necessary, each rule may indicate what is "current" by using point of view and grammar. In this rule, clearly the author of it sits (currently) at the end of the rule's effects because the entire rule is written in equivalent past tense... Except for the final phrase which is nominally in the present tense, "...leaving us with..." and clearly indicates what the "current" situation is. Style: The predator idea is retrofitted from Waggie's last try and the attempt to fool someone into thinking there were 3Z's instead of 2 was lame and (clearly) too risky. Positive points for the concept of the "internet" habitat. ************* 57:16 Jesse INVALID +1.0 Received: Fri, 24 May 1996 23:09:21 +0100 >>>>> Sexually Transmitted Disease. Each smoot is either infected or uninfected by the Fantasy Sex Virus. An infected smoot always dies (or otherwise ceases to exist, as by mating) by the end of the third rule of its infection. From now on there must always be at least one infected smoot. Whenever an infected smoot mates, one uninfected smoot of the species with which it is mating (if there is one) becomes infected. The offspring is also infected. Except for the first case, which appeared spontaneously in 57:11, this is the only way for smoots to become infected. Unaware of the danger of their actions, species continue to mate like wild snogs, begetting a B (J+S), a D (R+M), an N (S+V), and an O (W+S). We have: Species: X Y W R S V J M B D N O Smoots: 8 8 7 3 4 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 There are three infected smoots. The next valid rule must identify two of them. The third, we will unfortunately never be able to discover. >>>>> Judgement: By my count the correct population of the S should be 3. Style: A fun concept, I'm not real fond of the last line, though, and negative points for not checking the math. ************ -TWJ (Jeremy)