Studying Common Developmental Genomes in Hybrid and Symbiotic Formations

  • Konstantinos Antonakopoulos
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 238)


One of the main challenges in developmental systems is the design of a method for building complex systems with a structural or computational goal. In previous work, we studied the common properties of several computational architectures consisting of connected computational elements. Their common property of sparsely connected networks, envisages how universal properties and processes can be included in a developmental mapping through an EvoDevo approach. The potentiality of using the same developmental mapping, to develop more than one class of computational architectures was also investigated through Common Developmental Genomes. In this work, the focus is towards development of intra-connected computational architectures, forming a common biological entity - a Hybrid architecture. Also, we explore how common developmental genomes operate under symbiosis and their effect on the evolutionary performance of the partners involved. The results are enlightening gaining a deeper understanding of the capabilities and the limitations of common developmental genomes in these original formations.


Hybrid architectures Symbiosis Common developmental genomes cellular automata boolean network L-systems 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Kitano, H.: Designing Neural Networks Using Genetic Algorithms with Graph Generation Systems. Complex Systems 4(3), 461–476 (1990)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Miller, J.F., Thomson, P.: A Developmental Method for Growing Graphs and Circuits. In: Tyrrell, A.M., Haddow, P.C., Torresen, J. (eds.) ICES 2003. LNCS, vol. 2606, pp. 93–104. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gordon, T.G.W., Bentley, P.J.: Bias and Scalability in Evolutionary Development. In: Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO), pp. 83–90 (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Harding, S.L., Miller, J.F., Banzhaf, W.: Self-modifying cartesian genetic programming. In: Proceedings of the 9th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (GECCO), pp. 1021–1028. ACM Press (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Steiner, T., Trommler, J., Brenn, M., Jin, Y., Sendhoff, B.: Global Shape with Morphogen Gradients and Motile Polarized Cells. In: Congress on Evolutionary Computation, pp. 2225–2232. IEEE Press (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Von Neumann, J.: The Theory of Self-reproducing Automata. University of Illinois Press (1966)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kauffman, S.A., Johnsen, S.: Co-evolution to the edge of chaos: Coupled fitness landscapes, poised states and co-evolutionary avalanches. Artificial Life II, pp. 325–370. Addison-Wesley (1992)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Robert, J.S.: Embryology, Epigenesis and Evolution: Taking Development Seriously. Cambridge Studies in Philosophy and Biology. Cambridge University Press (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Antonakopoulos, K., Tufte, G.: A Common Genetic Representation Capable of Developing Distinct Computational Architectures. In: IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC 2011), pp. 1264–1271 (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Antonakopoulos, K., Tufte, G.: On the Evolvability of Different Computational Architectures using a Common Developmental Genome. In: Rosa, A., Dourado, A., Madani, K., Filipe, J., Kacprzyk, J. (eds.) IJCCI 2012, vol. 2012, pp. 122–129. SciTePress Publishing (2012)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Antonakopoulos, K., Tufte, G.: Is Common Developmental Genome a Panacea Towards More Complex Problems? In: 13th IEEE International Symposium on Computational Intelligence and Informatics (CINTI 2012), pp. 55–61 (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bull, L., Fogarty, L.C.: Artificial Symbiogenesis. Artificial Life 2(3), 269–292 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wilkins, J.: What is a species? Essences and generation. Theory in Biosciences 129(2), 141–148 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lindenmayer, A., Prusinkiewicz, P.: Developmental Models of Multicellular Organisms: A Computer Graphics Perspective. In: Langton, C.G. (ed.) Proceedings of ALife, pp. 221–249. Addison-Wesley Publishing (1989)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Stauffer, A., Sipper, M.: Modeling Cellular Development Using L-Systems. In: Sipper, M., Mange, D., Pérez-Uribe, A. (eds.) ICES 1998. LNCS, vol. 1478, pp. 196–205. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Antonakopoulos, K., Tufte, G.: Investigation of Developmental Mechanisms in Common Developmental Genomes. In: 7th International ICST Conference on Bio-Inspired Models of Network, Information and Computing Systems (BIONETICS), pp. xxx–xxx. Springer (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Thompson, J.N., Medel, R.: The coevolving web of life. Evolution: Education and Outreach 3(1), 6 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Momeni, B., Chen, C.C., Hillesland, K.L., Waite, A., Shou, W.: Using artificial systems to explore the ecology and evolution of symbioses. Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences 68(8), 1353–1368 (2011)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nowak, M., Tarnita, C., Antal, T.: Evolutionary dynamics in structured populations. Philos. Trans. of the Royal Society of London - B Biological Sciences 365(1537), 19–30 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bull, L., Alonso-Sanz, R.: On Coupling Random Boolean Networks. Automata 2008: Theory and Applications of Cellular Automata, pp. 292–301. Luniver Press (2008)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wilkinson, D.M.: At cross purposes. Nature, 412–485 (2001)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bull, L.: Artificial Symbiogenesis and Differing Reproduction Rates. Artificial Life 16(1), 65–72 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer and Information ScienceNorwegian University of Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations