Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- people:james_vickers [2014/11/13 04:10] – jvick3
+++ people:james_vickers [2014/12/07 22:37] (current) – jvick3
@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 Contact: jvick3@unm.edu
-[[people:james_vickers:crit1|Crit 1 materials]]
+[[people:james_vickers:project_submission|Project submission]]
+[[people:james_vickers:crit3|Crit 3 materials]]
 [[people:james_vickers:crit2|Crit 2 materials]]
+[[people:james_vickers:crit1|Crit 1 materials]]
 [[people:james_vickers:researcher_pres|Alife researcher presentation materials]]
-{{:people:james_vickers:model_desc_v2.pdf|Model description, v2 (PDF)}}
-[[people:james_vickers:model_desc_v2_plain|Model description, v2 (plain text)]]
-[[people:james_vickers:Figure 1|Figure 1]]
-[[people:james_vickers:first_graphs|Smattering of graphs]]
 Current title/abstract:
@@ Line 28: / Line 24: @@
 **Journal**
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+**11/21/2014**
+As I was writing my paper a few days ago, I found myself trying to explain why my Isolator's
+are programming to only do their swapping routine (//Bubble Repulsion//) when they are at a particular
+distance from an Element (R-1).  I could not for the life of me come up for why that was...I had
+originally done it because I thought I had seen it acting unstable without this check.  It was kind
+of an artifact of previous failed implementations of Bubble Repulsion.  I decided to remove this
+restriction and test it out.  It appeared to work well, better even.  I'm just about done re-running
+my experiment script with the slightly modified behavior; it looks like the protection performance
+of Isolator got better with this change.  It basically allows more Isolator's to engage in repulsion
+by allowing them to do so regardless of their distance from their protectee Atom.
+**Edit:** Wow, allowing Isolator's at any distance to repulse (rather than just R-1) improved the
+protection performance pretty significantly.  You can see the difference in some of my graphs, but the
+//half-lifes// really tell the tale.  I define half-life as the time in AEPS it takes for half of the Atom's in an experiment to be wiped out (by Eraser, usually).  A couple notable comparisons between limited and full repulsion:
+Eraser Distance 4, Inner Radius 3: \\
+Limited repulsion: Data Half-life = 2565, Eraser Half-life = 175\\
+Full repulsion:    Data Half-life = 16150 (+ 529.6%), Eraser Half-life = 180 (+ 2.9%)\\
+**Note: Eraser half-life doesn't change much because with Eraser Distance of 4, Isolator cannot surround it for long!**\\
+Eraser Distance 1, Inner Radius 2:\\
+Limited repulsion: Data Half-life = 5001, Eraser Half-life = 18765\\
+Full Repulsion: Data Half-life = 17155 (+ 243.0%), Eraser Half-life = 39245 (+ 109.1%)\\
+I'm very happy with this improvement.  It makes the algorithm simpler, and yet do its job a lot better.  What's not to like?
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------