Reactor Auto-Planner (Genetic algorithm to automatically design reactors)

I'd like to see more! Keep it up

What happens if you start it off with some human-created designs already known to work well, instead of whatever random mish-mash it generates randomly? Would is be able to find improvements that have slipped our engineers' brains?

Also, I see that a few of the designs on that page look kind of intelligently built, rather than a bunch of random components that happens to not explode. Keep up the good work.

And, a final suggestion: Make it work with MOX by having it really like designs that do not heat up or cool down over time while running, and like designs that don't cool when turned off either even more. Heat dumped into hull equalling that pulled out by vents and things is good; the smaller those rates are, the better.

Quote from crispy1989

Yes and no. The final phase of the genetic algorithm (the "promoted" population) is essentially an annealing/fine-tuning phase, where it only makes minor tweaks to make small optimizations, without changing the overall design. This could be applied to human-generated designs to make minor improvements. However, *only* minor improvements would result. Human-generated designs would lack genetic variability, which is key to the correct function of genetic algorithms. In DNA terms, human-generated designs lack introns.

But I would think that finding minor improvements to an existing design would be much faster than coming up with something on par with a human-created design first, even if you had to create some new variations yourself. You've said this thing takes days to run- clearly, time isn't a concern. If it was, though, I would try feeding your program something from the Official Reactor Designs thread, and seeing what it comes up with.

Quote from crispy1989

I'd be interested in having a contest between this genetic algorithm and a human designer. Specify a set of exact requirements on which designs are evaluated, pick the current best human-generated design, and see if the genetic algorithm can find a better design - without any help or pre-seeding from the human design. It's quite possible that this could outperform the human design process, making pre-seeding it with a human-generated design completely unnecessary.

I'd like to see that, too. Say you're looking for max EU/t from a 0-chamber reactor (3 columns) using only single cells. This design is already engineered for precisely this purpose.

Quote from crispy1989

Only the very first generation is random components thrown together. Complex patterns arising in the result doesn't imply intelligent design - just as the complex arrangement of molecules and cells in animals doesn't.

Of that, I am very well aware. I was specifically referring to designs that looked something like this amid obviously random nonsense. Columns of single cells topped with dual cells isn't something I would've tried, but that's the whole point of having a computer try lots of things.

Quote from crispy1989

I haven't coded in support for MOX fuel cells yet. I may add support if there's enough interest, but the result would likely take longer to stabilize, as exact equilibrium is harder to achieve using annealing-style techniques. Also, if I do add support for MOX cells, it wouldn't rate reactors based on the equilibrium being achieved - it would rate designs based on the same basic factors, eu produced, cycle time, efficiency, etc. The nature of the algorithm is that many different approaches can achieve the same result. Consider the case of a reactor that (somehow?) produces a sinusoidal wave of heat. While not in equilibrium, such a reactor could potentially have better overall results.

MOX fuel works exactly like normal fuel, except it burns half as long and produces more power if the reactor is hotter. With normal reactors, you want them to cool down faster than the uranium heats them up, in case something goes wrong. However, with MOX, you want it to be balanced, so the reactor stays hot after you heat it up. Additionally, designs that do not transfer heat between the reactor core and the components are even more preferable, because they don't cool down after the fuel expires.
All you'd need to do is edit your scoring algorithm to give reactors with more balance and less core transfer higher scores.

Also, I'm pretty sure fluctuating heat is impossible- unless you count Mark 1s and 2s periodically running out of fuel; Mark 3s, 4s, and 5s periodically being switched on and off; and the last couple hundred heat bouncing around in things like this cooling tower. While your point may be valid in some cases, I don't think most players want to use a MOX reactor that cannot remain stable at 85% heat- anything cooler means a smaller MOX efficiency boost, and anything hotter means stuff will start melting into lava.

Quote from crispy1989

The way these types of algorithms work, they "figure out" what needs to occur to get to the end goal (which is an efficient reactor that doesn't explode), instead of being programmed with intermediate goals (such as trying to balance heat transfer). This allows them to approach problems (insofar as random mutations are an approach) in ways that a human may have not even considered.

But balanced heat transfer IS an end goal- arguably the most important end goal- of a MOX design, and not using components that interact with hull heat is the best way to fulfil it. As I noted above, you'd just need to work that into your scoring algorithm, alongside cost, efficiency, output, etc; or follow SpwnX's suggestion and ban basic, advanced, and reactor exchangers as well as reactor and overclocked vents altogether. You wouldn't even need to take special action against designs that put heat into the reactor hull with the latter suggestion- with nothing to take it back out, all such designs would explode.

Quote from SpwnX

For MOX designs, you just "blacklist" reactor hull heat transfer.

Wouldn't that just make the algorithm fill the reactor with only MOX fuel?

Quote from hoho

Wouldn't that just make the algorithm fill the reactor with only MOX fuel?

No, it would only block the Basic, Reactor, and Advanced Heat Exchangers and the Reactor and Overclocked Heat Vents. These are the only components than remove heat from the reactor hull- designs that use them tend to cool down over time, which is not good for MOX reactors. MOX fuel burns more efficiently when the reactor is hot, so you want MOX reactors to stay hot all the time.

Ah, my bad. I mixed them up with the cooling-tower needing designs

how could i run this for myself?

Hey,

the web page is not working for me, so i can't see the results of your run. Is there a summary available somewhere?

With the future updates in mind(MOX and heat reactor) i would like to copy your code and implement the new changes. Would that be okay for you?

I'm also curious to know what you came up with.

I am running the simulation on 8 machines at my university. I started yesterday and until now there are no exceptional designs. One Efficiency 4 reactor developed, the rest is mostly efficiency 3-3.7

The reactors run at 100 EU/t in average, so unfortunately no efficiency 3 400EU/t reactor yet

Haven't asked yet but the jobs are all running with nice lvl of 19, so nobody should be bothered. The systems were all on idle before.

Because there are no lectures at the moment nobody is sitting in the computer rooms. I'm not using some computing cluster that is running on heavy load 24/7 where i would delay scientific work, just some workstations in the computer rooms.

I can always defend with the argument that i wanted to see how the genetic algorithm develops over time and that i am trying to optimize it. Since i am studying physics and programming is important i don't see a problem, but i'll ask the admin on monday.