Environment as a spatial constraint on the growth of structural form
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We explore the use of the developmental environment as a spatial constraint on a model of Artificial Embryogeny, applied to the growth of structural forms. A Deva model is used to translate genotype to phenotype, allowing a Genetic Algorithm to evolve Plane Trusses. Genomes are expressed in one of several developmental environments, and selected using a fitness function favouring stability, height, and distribution of pressure. Positive results are found in nearly all cases, demonstrating that environment can be used as an effective spatial constraint on development. Further experiments take genomes evolved in some environment and transplant them into different environments, or re-grow them at different phenotypic sizes; It is shown that while some genomes are highly specialized for the particular environment in which they evolved, others may be re-used in a different context without significant re-design, retaining the majority of their original utility. This strengthens the notion that growth via Artificial Embryogeny can be resistant to perturbations in environment, and that good designs may be re-used in a variety of contexts.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it