More appropriate default fitness function in Topology_GPTools · Issue #3 · p-chambers/occ_airconics · GitHub
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The current default fitness function is based on a bounding box volume. This is not a good option, as the geometry is sized relative to the top-most component in the hierarchy - in any case, volume is not a good fitness function.
An alternative, perhaps based on a similarity or 'tree edit distance' to a particular component hierarchy may be useful here. For example, testing how close the component hierarchy tree is to that of a 787 should hopefully eventually lead to a 787 - a good test to see if the evolutionary algorithm is working. More complex fitness functions may later be added, such as aero-structural and stability analysis.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The current default fitness function is based on a bounding box volume. This is not a good option, as the geometry is sized relative to the top-most component in the hierarchy - in any case, volume is not a good fitness function.
An alternative, perhaps based on a similarity or 'tree edit distance' to a particular component hierarchy may be useful here. For example, testing how close the component hierarchy tree is to that of a 787 should hopefully eventually lead to a 787 - a good test to see if the evolutionary algorithm is working. More complex fitness functions may later be added, such as aero-structural and stability analysis.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: