This repository was archived by the owner on Aug 11, 2025. It is now read-only.
Set genome_indexer to last key in population +1 on checkpoint restore #287
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
When restoring a population from a checkpoint, the
genome_indexercount is re-initialized from 1, and this causes genomes to be overwritten when the keys collide.I came across the issue when I was investigating why my best genomes in a species would suddenly drop in fitness even if I had elitism configured and was using a deterministic fitness function. Turns out they were being overwritten by new children that were given the same key. I also kept getting smaller populations than the size defined in the config, and I think this is the reason for that as well.
This PR adds functionality that re-initializes the
genome_indexercount to the last key in the population + 1.I'm not sure if I've implemented the fix in the correct place, so let me know if I should make changes to better align with the project conventions :)