Evolutionary/Genetic Algorithms

[sfs]

Every individual DOES have its own sets of mutations. It's called the mutation rate. Humans on average have about 175 of them if I remember correctly.

More like 75. The mutation rate in humans is currently estimated to be about 1.2 x 10^-8 per base-pair per generation.

 

[DogmaHunter]

I stand corrected.

 

[juvenissun]

Yikes. Nothing you've written here makes any sense. Why on earth would you think it very unlikely that a single monkey or ape species could become separated into two geographically separated groups that could no longer interbreed? That kind of thing happens all the time.

As for mutations, you've completely misunderstood evolution. A group of chimps don't mutate the way; one of them has a mutation, and then that mutation gradually spreads in the population from generation to generation.

Good grief.

I know what you said above. I did not say anything contradict to that. I sometimes use wrong statement in argument. But I always put IF before it. Of course, the conclusion would also be wrong.

 

[juvenissun]

Tell that to chimps and bonobos that are currently separated by the Congo River.

Added by edit:

Just found this nice little paper:
The bonobo genome compared with the chimpanzee and human genomes : Nature : Nature Publishing Group

It contains a discussion of the data showing the divergence of the chimp and bonobo genomes, as well as this nice little diagram showing the distribution of the bonobo and chimp populations. Once again, we see that genetic isolation due to geographic barriers does happen, even in species from our kind, the Hominidae.

SFS: Does this one contradict to what you just told me?

 

[Loudmouth]

SFS: Does this one contradict to what you just told me?

It directly contradicts your claims.

"But that kind of isolation is very unlikely for whatever the monkey species was."--juvenissun

 

[juvenissun]

Mutations happen in individuals, yes. They then reproduce with peers and pass on their mutation. The off spring then does the same. And so on and so on. And then after a sufficient amoutn of generations, the mutation achieves "fixation". Ie: part of the genome.

So, every individual in a group mutates in a different way. How do you program that?

 

[juvenissun]

It directly contradicts your claims.

"But that kind of isolation is very unlikely for whatever the monkey species was."--juvenissun

I learned this from sfs.
Ask him.

 

[Loudmouth]

I learned this from sfs.

Where did he teach you that genetic isolation is so unlikely that it can never happen?

 

[Loudmouth]

So, every individual in a group mutates in a different way. How do you program that?

Every individual is born with their own mutations which they pass on to their offspring. If an individual has many descendants, then those descendants will share the mutations that occurred in their shared ancestor.

 

[bhsmte]

I learned this from sfs.
Ask him.

Learned something from someone else?

If I am not mistaken, you have claimed you have more knowledge about evolution than anyone?

Was I mistaken?

 

[DogmaHunter]

So, every individual in a group mutates in a different way. How do you program that?

With every post you make, it becomes clearer and clearer that you never ever looked into evolution theory and never listened when someone explained it to you.

How can you not know that mutations occurs in individuals?

The process in a GA, as the car app I linked you to (which you didn't even bother to look at, or you would have allready known this):

0. Generate X random dna strings, where X is the population size.
1. Fitness test (calculate the fitness of every individual )
2. Selection (in simplest form: the top performers)
3. Create breeding pairs and reproduce (= merge the DNA of both parents into off spring
4. Mutate the off spring (= loop over the individuals of the population, and randomly mutate their DNA string)

You now have a new generation. Repeat step 1 to 4 X times, where X is the amount of generations you wish to continue the process.

It's not hard...

 

[sfs]

I learned this from sfs.
Ask him.

I did what now?

 

[juvenissun]

Learned something from someone else?

If I am not mistaken, you have claimed you have more knowledge about evolution than anyone?

Was I mistaken?

I never said that. You are mistaken.

 

[juvenissun]

I did what now?

The paper suggested a genetic isolation.
You said it is not likely to happen.

 

[juvenissun]

0. Generate X random dna strings, where X is the population size.
1. Fitness test (calculate the fitness of every individual )
2. Selection (in simplest form: the top performers)
3. Create breeding pairs and reproduce (= merge the DNA of both parents into off spring
4. Mutate the off spring (= loop over the individuals of the population, and randomly mutate their DNA string)

You now have a new generation. Repeat step 1 to 4 X times, where X is the amount of generations you wish to continue the process.

It's not hard...

Thanks (is this the first time I thank you?, now you should know what and how to talk to me). There are several questions about that. But pick one first:

You do steps 1 and 2, in particular, step 2, because of the limitation of computing power? How do you know the less fit in the first run will not become better fit in the later runs?

 

[digitalgoth]

The paper suggested a genetic isolation.
You said it is not likely to happen.

People become isolated all the time. Also, it's not just isolation that causes it changes, there's also genetic drift, which can happen without social isolation which also causes changes in the population as well. Genetic drift is a change in the frequency of a change over time that eventually becomes fixated. If during the selection and mutation process of your population, a few have a mutation that gets randomly selected more often, it will start to have more and more frequency in the population, without and isolation required, just statistics.

You don't need physical isolation to change groups. The "isolation" refers to the propagation of changes in breeding groups.

If a group of people inbreed next door from you for their own reasons, they're going to start looking very very different within a few generations. There is no physical reason you aren't interbreeding, but that's not how selection works. People can be socially isolated, economically isolated, politically isolated.

 

[DogmaHunter]

You do steps 1 and 2, in particular, step 2, because of the limitation of computing power?

No. It's a genetic algorithm. It means that we use the principles of biological evolution to optimize systems to accomplish a certain goal - just like biological evolution optimizes species to fill a specific niche and thus become better at surviving and reproducing in that environment.

Step 1 and 2 is the equivalent of natural selection.
You continue in the next generation with the best performing systems and you discard the rest.

How do you know the less fit in the first run will not become better fit in the later runs?

Because if we skip step 1 and 2, we will end up with unfiltered randomness.

The entire point is to zero in on the best possible performance.
To do that, you need keep what works best and discard the rest.

See, this is why people say that evolution isn't simply "random".
The modifications are random, but what gets through to the next generation most certainly isn't.

is this the first time I thank you?, now you should know what and how to talk to me

Well, sorry if I'm blunt and somewhat attacking or frustrated.
I have no issue at all with people who are genuinly ignorant on a topic. That's fine and there's no shame in that at all.

But what bothers the hell out of me is that I've seen you arguing against evolution. And here, I find out that you don't even know that mutations occur in individuals, that humans did NOT evolve from chimps but rather share an ancestor with them, etc etc.

Again, I have no problems at all with people being ignorant on certain subjects. I'm ignorant about lots of things. But please, just admit it if that is the case. And don't pretend that you can argue against those things you clearly have 0 knowledge about.

 

[sfs]

The paper suggested a genetic isolation.
You said it is not likely to happen.

I recall saying that genetic isolation was unlikely to happen for humans, because it is unlikely. But I've never said that about species generally.

 

[juvenissun]

Step 1 and 2 is the equivalent of natural selection.
You continue in the next generation with the best performing systems and you discard the rest.

Because if we skip step 1 and 2, we will end up with unfiltered randomness.

The entire point is to zero in on the best possible performance.
To do that, you need keep what works best and discard the rest.

So, if you started with 100 objects (DNA?), then you make them go through the steps 1 and 2, and to steps 3 and 4. At the end of step 4, how many individuals would you still have? still 100?

If so, would you ended up with the last 100 objects that ALL fit? In other words, through the X cycles, the individuals that fit the criteria will become more and more. Is that right?

 

[juvenissun]

I recall saying that genetic isolation was unlikely to happen for humans, because it is unlikely. But I've never said that about species generally.

I know.

In this linked study about chimp and bonobo, do you think the genetic difference is caused by the geographic isolation?