Eco-Evo-Devo in the Adaptive Evolution of Artificial Creatures Within a 3D Physical Environment

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article entitled "Eco-evo-devo in the adaptive evolution of artificial creatures within a 3D physical environment" has the objective of analyze the behavior of a 3D evolutionary model in terms of niche construction and development in the presence of ecological inheritance within a complex environment focusing on its effects on emerging adaptive morphology and behavior.

In the introduction section, the authors correctly reflect previous studies in the context of artificial life and evolutionary robotics by referring to development, which generally refers to the processes by which an agent's morphology and behavior change over its lifetime. In this aspect they refer to niche construction as playing a crucial role in evolution because organisms can actively modify their environments and those of others, thus influencing evolutionary processes. 

The structure of the article needs to be specified at the end of the introduction section.

Section 2 presents the model developed in an evolutionary framework of artificial creatures in a 3D multi-agent environment based on the Python physics engine (PyBullet) where the eco-evo-devo in the emergent morphology and behavior of artificial creatures is analyzed. To this end, the authors propose the development of multiple rigid-body artificial creatures composed of several blocks that are simultaneously evaluated in a large flat space with two valleys in a 3D virtual environment, where they must reach a goal based on their evolution in terms of morphological changes through growth and the addition of new body parts throughout their life, controlled by neural network outputs, based on programmed developmental processes such as lifelong development (LD) and early development (ID), which allows to analyze morphological adaptation to environmental conditions and to overcome obstacles.  The description of the model is correct.

The experimentation section shows in detail the process followed in the simulation and the results obtained. In addition, the authors provide complementary material that allows us to visualize the behavior of the agents in achieving the final goal in different scenarios. In view of the results, the authors emphasize that ecological inheritance had more or less negative effects on the adaptive evolution of the artificial creatures in terms of fitness. 

The authors have proposed a coevolutionary model that integrates niche construction and morphological development to study the evolution of adaptive morphology and behavior in artificial creatures within a three-dimensional multi-agent environment. The study evaluates how a population of creatures must overcome two valleys through their morphological development, incorporating ecological inheritance to analyze the effects of constructed objects in the environment. The experiments revealed that varying levels of ecological inheritance distinctly influenced the evolution of niche construction and development. 

In my view, the objective outlined in this research is highly intriguing, and the analysis conducted provides a detailed account of the behavior of these agents. It highlights the dynamic interaction between development and niche construction, which is dependent on environmental changes.

 

  • What is the main question addressed by the research?
As indicated in the previous review, the main question addressed by the research is precisely the understanding of the behavior of a 3D evolutionary model in terms of niche construction and development in the presence of ecological inheritance within a complex environment, focusing on its effects on emergent adaptive morphology and behavior.

• Do you consider the topic original or relevant to the field? Does it address a specific gap in the field? Please also explain why this is/ is not the case.
The proposed topic is, from my point of view, original and relevant since it addresses the simulation of niche construction as something that plays a crucial role in evolution because organisms can actively modify their environment and that of others, thus influencing evolutionary processes. With this simulation and the results obtained, conclusions can be drawn about the influence of ecological inheritance in a field such as Eco-evo-devo applied to artificial creatures.

• What does it add to the subject area compared with other published material?
The paper focuses on the co-evolution of niche construction and the development of a complex environment taking into account ecological inheritance. To this end, the effects this has on the adaptive emergent morphology and behavior of artificial creature simulations are explored. Considering the above, the co-evolution of niche building behaviors and the development of complex physical structures remains underexplored and is therefore relevant in comparison to other published material.

• What specific improvements should the authors consider regarding the methodology? What further controls should be considered?
From my point of view, the authors have used a correct methodology focusing on the evolution of complex creatures that evolve to achieve an end, to reach an objective by overcoming a series of obstacles. Although it is true that different creatures could be considered with a different evolutionary morphology, i.e. with other forms, and as indicated by the authors, the analysis and study of cooperative tasks between creatures and an increase in the complexity of the random environment suggest different types of evolution of these creatures.  

• Are the conclusions consistent with the evidence and arguments presented and do they address the main question posed? Please also explain why this is/is not the case.
The conclusions presented by the authors are, in my view, consistent with the main objective of the research. The authors argue on the basis of the evidence that different degrees of ecological inheritance affected the evolution of niche construction and development differently. Therefore, the complex interaction in the coevolution of niche construction and development due to ecological inheritance has been evidenced. Furthermore, the analysis of the proposed case study LN + NC showed complementary roles between morphological development and niche construction, such that morphological development facilitated the crossing of Valley 1, while niche construction helped in Valley 2.

• Are the references appropriate?
Yes.

• Any additional comments on the tables and figures.
Among the complementary materials, the authors provide the videos that facilitate the visualization and understanding of the evolution of the morphology and movement of the creatures. However, the reference to the source code links to the videos proposed by the authors.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors presented the results of research on the roles of lifetime development and niche construction in evolutionary processes. The research was performed using the developed model of rigid creatures crossing the valley. The model was implemented using 3D multi-agent environment based on the Python module-based physics engine PyBullet. The experiments were aimed at verification of the impact of the two mentioned factors and interactions between them on the evolutionary processes. The experiments provided interesting outcomes, which can be the basis for future research. Please address the following issues: 1. Please describe more formally (using pseudocode) the evolutionary algorithm realized in the multi-agent environment. 2. Please provide all the details of the algorithm: representation of the genotype, operators, and values of the parameters. 3. Please explain clearly what the actual goal of the research is. Is it research aimed at simulation-based investigation and explanation of certain evolutionary processes occurring in real ecosystems? Or is the goal to develop algorithms and methods that can be used in evolutionary robotics? 4. Please improve the English language when it comes to grammar and style.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article, Eco-evo-devo in the adaptive evolution of artificial creatures within a 3D physical environment, explores the coevolution of development, niche construction, and ecological inheritance in artificial creatures. Here are key points from the review:

1. How does the choice of block size and shape for niche construction influence the adaptability of creatures in environments beyond the two-valley scenario?
2. Could the stagnation in fitness under high ecological inheritance (EI) percentages be mitigated by introducing a decay mechanism for inherited blocks?
3. How transferable are the findings of this study to real-world robotic systems or ecological simulations?
4. The study mentions complementary roles between lifetime development (LD) and niche construction (NC). Can these findings suggest broader principles for coevolutionary dynamics in natural systems?
5. Would increasing the diversity of environmental challenges (e.g., more complex terrain) alter the observed dynamics between LD, NC, and EI?

Comments:
The exploration of ecological inheritance is compelling, particularly in how it shifts adaptive strategies, but its negative effects in high percentages could be elaborated with theoretical reasoning or broader simulations.
The analogy between the evolutionary behavior of artificial creatures and natural systems, like beavers, is insightful and helps bridge computational models and biological relevance.
The detailed breakdown of experimental cases is helpful, though a summary table linking key observations to broader implications might improve clarity.
The use of Python's PyBullet engine is a good choice for realistic physics simulations, but it would be interesting to see how alternative engines or methods might influence the results.
The discussion on maladaptive consequences of niche construction under certain conditions is particularly thought-provoking and could be expanded to address how these challenges parallel evolutionary trade-offs in nature.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have addressed the most important issues, so the paper can be accepted.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have addressed and responded to all the points raised.