There seems to be a lot of chatter about genetic algorithms in recent days, for example:
- Genetic A/B Testing with JavaScript: a discussion by John Resig about reverse engineering the Genetify service that seemingly uses a genetic algorithm to drive split testing. Seems like a problematic approach to me, good for sampling the space, but poor for confidence-based decision making over what design to choose.
- CSSEvolve: guided stylesheet evolution: an introduction by Andrew Cantino to CSS Evolve service by IterationLabs that provides an interactive GA for basic sampling CSS designs for a given page (varies fonts, colors, etc). Interesting notion, and likely a good application for an interactive evolutionary algorithm.
- Evolution Produces Better Antenna; Casey Luskin Very Upset: on Good Math, Bad Math by Mark Chu-Carroll discussing how some intelligent design evangelist talking about the post of another evangelist, both of which were unhappy by the (awesome) GA-designed antenna work at NASA from 2004 (old news).
Although I've created wiki pages before, this recent bout got me thinking how useful this service could be if it were elaborated by experts in the field. Although it's an encyclopedia, it would be within scope to motivate fields of research, even highlight open problems and provide sample code and test data. Wiki pages could be a useful valuable scientific resources, rather than a #1 Google result that is ignored by those in the field. I'm now thinking how Knol fits into these perspective...



3 comments:
I did a little digging into knol. I like the idea of authoritative articles. It provides a much more accessible platform for knowledge distribution than a technical report on a topic.
I also came across scholarpedia and read up on it as well. Scholarpedia seems to take the knol approach too far, allowing only the seminal experts (inventors) to edit and maintain entries for the topics - making it more authoritative, but also more ridged.
The scope of scholarpedia is much smaller, focusing on only a few specific fields, one of which is an Encyclopedia of computational intelligence. I had seen this before, but not really understood the context of the articles.
A great post and discussion on encouraging professors to update the wikipedia pages for their fields of research, focused on theoretical computer science, entitled: Wanted: Better Wikipedia coverage of theoretical computer science.
Hi, I put some time into cleaning up genetify (the software that John Resig wrote about). Anybody can install it now and try it out for themselves. Hopefully some developers out there will pick up on my initial efforts and genetify will grow to become a thriving open-source project.
http://github.com/gregdingle/genetify/wikis/home
Any feedback is appreciated.
Post a Comment