For decades, the evolution of cooperation has piqued interest in numerous academic disciplines, such as game theory, economics, biology, and computer science. In this work, we demonstrate the emergence of a novel and effective resource exchange protocol formed by dropping and picking up resources in a foraging environment. This form of cooperation is made possible by the introduction of a campfire, which adds an extended period of congregation and downtime for agents to explore otherwise unlikely interactions. We find that the agents learn to avoid getting cheated by their exchange partners, but not always from a third party. We also observe the emergence of behavior analogous to tolerated theft, despite the lack of any punishment, combat, or larceny mechanism in the environment.

We examine the effect of cooperative and competitive interactions on the evolution of complex strategies in a prediction game. We extend previous work to the domain of noisy games, defining a new organism and mutation model, and an accompanying novel complexity metric. We find that a mix of cooperation and competition is the most effective in driving complexity growth, confirming prior results. We also compare our complexity metric with simpler metrics such as raw strategy size, and demonstrate the effectiveness of our metric in distinguishing true complexity from mere genetic bloat.

The escalation of complexity is a commonly cited benefit of coevolutionary systems, but computational simulations generally fail to demonstrate this capacity to a satisfactory degree. We draw on a macroevolutionary theory of escalation to develop a set of criteria for coevolutionary systems to exhibit escalation of strategic complexity. By expanding on a previously developed model of the evolution of memory length for cooperative strategies by Kristian Lindgren, we resolve previously observed limitations on the escalation of memory length by extending operators of evolutionary variation. We present long-term coevolutionary simulations showing that larger population sizes tend to support greater escalation of complexity than smaller ones do. Additionally, we investigate the sensitivity of escalation during transitions of complexity. The Lindgren model has often been used to argue that the escalation of competitive coevolution has intrinsic limitations. Our simulations show that coevolutionary arms races can continue to escalate in computational simulations given sufficient population sizes.

To study open-ended coevolution, we define a complexity metric over interacting finite state machines playing formal language prediction games, and study the dynamics of populations under competitive and cooperative interactions. In the past purely competitive and purely cooperative interactions have been studied extensively, but neither can successfully and continuously drive an arms race. We present quantitative results using this complexity metric and analyze the causes of varying rates of complexity growth across different types of interactions. We find that while both purely competitive and purely cooperative coevolution are able to drive complexity growth above the rate of genetic drift, mixed systems with both competitive and cooperative interactions achieve significantly higher evolved complexity.

All multicellular living beings are created from a single cell. A developmental process, called embryogenesis, takes this first fertilized cell down a complex path of reproduction, migration, and specialization into a complex organism adapted to its environment. In most cases, the first steps of the embryogenesis take place in a protected environment such as in an egg or in utero. Starting from this observation, we propose a new approach to the generation of real robots, strongly inspired by living systems. Our robots are composed of tens of specialized cells, grown from a single cell using a bio-inspired virtual developmental process. Virtual cells, controlled by gene regulatory networks, divide, migrate, and specialize to produce the robot's body plan (morphology), and then the robot is manually built from this plan. Because the robot is as easy to assemble as Lego, the building process could be easily automated.

Creating artificial life forms through evolutionary robotics faces a “chicken and egg” problem: Learning to control a complex body is dominated by problems specific to its sensors and effectors, while building a body that is controllable assumes the pre-existence of a brain. The idea of coevolution of bodies and brains is becoming popular, but little work has been done in evolution of physical structure because of the lack of a general framework for doing it. Evolution of creatures in simulation has usually resulted in virtual entities that are not buildable, while embodied evolution in actual robotics is constrained by the slow pace of real time. The work we present takes a step in addressing the problem of body evolution by applying evolutionary techniques to the design of structures assembled out of elementary components that stick together. Evolution takes place in a simulator that computes forces and stresses and predicts stability of three-dimensional brick structures. The final printout of our program is a schematic assembly, which is then built physically. We demonstrate the functionality of this approach to robot body building with many evolved artifacts.