<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<article xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="1.1" xml:lang="en">
  <front>
    <journal-meta>
      <journal-id>authorea</journal-id>
      <publisher>
        <publisher-name>Authorea</publisher-name>
      </publisher>
    </journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.15200/winn.152418.86598</article-id>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>What&amp;#x2019;s holding artificial life back from open-ended evolution?</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes">
          <name>
            <surname>Dolson</surname>
            <given-names>Emily</given-names>
          </name>
          <address>
            <institution>Michigan State University</institution>
          </address>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no">
          <name>
            <surname>Vostinar</surname>
            <given-names>Anya</given-names>
          </name>
          <address>
            <institution>Michigan State University</institution>
          </address>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no">
          <name>
            <surname>Ofria</surname>
            <given-names>Charles</given-names>
          </name>
          <address>
            <institution>Michigan State University</institution>
          </address>
        </contrib>
      </contrib-group>
      <pub-date date-type="preprint" publication-format="electronic">
        <day>17</day>
        <month>4</month>
        <year>2023</year>
      </pub-date>
      <self-uri xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.15200/winn.152418.86598">This preprint is available at https://doi.org/10.15200/winn.152418.86598</self-uri>
      <abstract abstract-type="abstract">
        <p>Evolutionary artificial life systems have demonstrated many exciting
behaviors. However, there is a general consensus that these systems are
missing some element of the consistent evolutionary innovation that we
see in nature. Many have sought to create more “open-ended”
evolutionary systems in which no stagnation occurs, but have been
stymied by the difficulty of quantifying progress towards such a
nebulous concept. Here, we propose an alternate framework for thinking
about these problems. By measuring obstacles to continued innovation, we
can move towards a mechanistic understanding of what drives various
evolutionary dynamics. We propose that this framework will allow for
more rigorous hypothesis testing and clearer applications of these
concepts to evolutionary computation.</p>
      </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
</article>
