Dekker1/ResearchMethods
Archived
1
0
Fork 0
Code

Fixed some stuff

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Silver-T 2018-05-17 11:08:39 +10:00
parent ad74731c9a
commit d112881358
1 changed files with 3 additions and 3 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

6
wk10/week10.tex
View File

@ -22,14 +22,14 @@
% \usepackage{graphicx}
\begin{document}
\title{Week 8 - Quantitative data analysis}
\title{Week 10 - Quantitative Data Analysis}
\author{Kelvin Davis \and Jip J. Dekker\and Tony Silvestere}
\maketitle
\section{Overview}
\section{Method and Results}
\section{Hill Climbing and Genetic Algorithms}
% Describe methods
% How did we collect data (and how we made it precise by averaging data)
The experiment compared the capability of two algorithms to generate words from scratch. The first algorithm, the hill climbing approach, randomly 'guesses' each character of the required word, and fixes the ones that are correctly guessed in their respective place. The second approach however, uses a genetic algorithm to generate the words by 'breeding' the most correct words at each iteration.
@ -65,7 +65,7 @@
\caption{Repeated measurements of the fitness of the genetic algorithm (as a percentage of the word) against the number of iterations taken}
\label{fig:fitness2}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
% Make sure Qs are answered
\end{document}