Newsgroups: comp.ai.genetic
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!newshost.marcam.com!zip.eecs.umich.edu!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!gatech!swrinde!pipex!sunsite.doc.ic.ac.uk!dcs.gla.ac.uk!unix.brighton.ac.uk!am88
From: am88@unix.brighton.ac.uk ( AABS )
Subject: Re: Definition of Genetic Programming
Message-ID: <1994Nov17.195152.14046@unix.brighton.ac.uk>
Organization: University of Brighton, UK
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <mreddy-141194082133@mreddy.comp.glam.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 1994 19:51:52 GMT
Lines: 24

Mike Reddy (mreddy@glamorgan.ac.uk) wrote:
: One of my colleagues and I were discussing the title proposed to us by a
: research student: "Genetic Programming Using Cross-over". He wishes to use
: cross-over to evolve CoreWar warriors, but is this genetic programming? My
: colleague suggested that only manipulation of a tree structure was
: considered REAL genetic programming (and cited Koza, naturally). However,
: my student made the comment that programs are being produced, that are
: evolved using genetic techniques.

: I think there must be some confusion between the two - which I would like
: to arbitrate - because of the use of the term 'genetic'. Is the student in
: error because he is mixing up artificial life (which is what his work is
: Essentially) with 'proper' GP?

arbitration is not really necessary is it?

after all all structures that are malleable are subject to manipulation
and thus all structures that are malleable can be subjected to evolving
manipulation, the structure being evolved is completely irrelevant.

after all would it be genetic algorithms at work on a human or genetic programming. or neither or both?

andrew matthews

