>
> Each mini expert would modify and score the design. In effect they became
> the fitness function for the GA. It was largely a blackboard system, the GA
> threw the initial data onto the blackboard and the experts adjusted it until
> either they cycled or no one could find anything else to do. Then it went
> back to the GA.

This smacks of something similar:

But mini-expert is too much, these "boid" entities are more
"nano data gathers with mosquito like wits" or some suitably be-humble-
ified equivalent. Seriously. (Maybe that's why it takes 10k or so of
them to take over the vacuum department at WalMart. )

They make maybe 2-5 assertions.

And are only interested in Pass/Fail.


----------------------

Mixed into this is the fact that they do not actually "make
decisions",  so much as cause things to happen with respect to the
HelperClasses - see Ruleby - I think same concept.


To add a little more confusion there are already three "boid"ypes:
Verify (pass/fail), Review (push through a human opinion), and Report
(outputs something for humans - so it gets a little fuzzy what is
being compared to what. And there is more but.... THANKS for giving me
something concrete to compare to)


PETER,

I'll be very interested if the two systems seem similar to you!


PS
I am a humble programmer,  and  I like programming much more than
talking or writing about it. I'm still trying to understand why "the
web" doesn't seem to use anything like this stuff yet.  If it was
pounded out 20 years ago, I'd expect that I'd see some evidence of
this kind of thing working. And in my defense, I have backed into this
trying to solve a real problem and make an honest living from here in
the woods.  Boids were the last thing on my mind when I started this
project.

I see the greatest leverage as being from "externally contributed" but
I've written about that already.  And I do not see the Financial stuff
as the best domain to show off in by any means.