Talk:Genetic algorithm
Doesn't Hubert Dreyfus include genetic algoritms in his 'Strong AI' category, together with neural nets?
Have his 'anti-Strong AI' fellow-travellers John Searle or Roger Penrose ever commented on this?
I was reading this sentence and I don't think it makes sense. "Genetic programming algorithms typically require running time that is orders of magnitude greater than that for genetic algorithms, but they may be suitable for problems that are intractable with genetic algorithms."
Shouldn't the two instances of "genetic algorithms" (one immediately before the comma and the last one) be "non-genetic algorithms"?
I have a feeling that I've somehow misunderstood the topic.. Neoncow 20:53, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- "Genetic programming" (GP) is different from "genetic algorithms" (GA) due to historical nomenclature. The sentence is supposed be comparing GPs with GAs, but it's very ambiguous as written. I'll rewrite it. --Lexor|Talk 07:03, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Could this bit of jargon be merged here? Building block hypothesis--nixie 00:50, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
This article was a very good overview of GAs. But I thought this sentence was a bit misleading:
- The pool is sorted, with those having better fitness (representing better solutions to the problem) ranked at the top.
Although fitness numbers serve to rank individuals, actually sorting them is a very expensive process, rarely done in practice. Roulette and tournament selection were both designed to choose higher ranked individuals stochastically, without the need for explicit sorting. --Bytefield 15:06, 23 July 2005 (UTC)