Optimizing catalysts for natural-ability

[MathAndCode]

When someone finds a new catalyst, it is often soon optimized for bounding box and/or population (if it wasn't already). I propose that catalysts of appropriate size also be optimized for natural-ability, i.e. the ability to show up naturally from a random soup. For example, which semi-cenark catalyst variant seems more likely to turn up in a random soup: this variant, which has a worm-like section that I see pop up fairly often in Symbiosis, or this variant, which is two cells smaller? The correct answer is the first variant—by an overwhelming margin (284 to 1). This suggests that the first variant is easier to construct with gliders, and indeed, it's four gliders cheaper. It's probably also easier to make via slow salvo/single-channel construction, as one of the twelve-glider syntheses consists of an R-sequence, for which there are multiple one-glider seeds, hitting some common objects.

Code: Select all

x = 24, y = 16, rule = B3/S23
13bo$12bobo6b2o$11bo2bo6b2o$12b2o2$9b2o$8bo2bo$8bobo$9bo2$17bo$16b3o3b
2o$bo16bo3b2o$obo$obo$bo!

(Note: In the version of that synthesis optimized for gliders coming from any direction instead of only one direction, one of the blocks is replaced with a glider, and the other block is replaced with a bi-block in order to save a cleanup glider.)

[bubblegum]

Why will catalysts need to be more natural? Self-constructing circuitry.
What's the main component in that which is affected? Slow salvo construction.
What's viable for slow salvo construction? Spartan objects.
How does a catalyst become Spartan? When slmake knows enough about how to construct it.
When does slmake need to know about it? When it's useful.
When is it useful? Anything that isn't obsoleted by H/B/R tracks.
What does obsoleted mean in this context? When slow salvo preparation becomes faster/easier for an alternative.
What's a good indicator for slow salvo optimisation? When it's at least ten or so thousand ticks faster or a few thousand cells smaller in both directions smaller to swap it for an alternative. (Bonus points for uncompactness.)

[s]Why do you need to create a million threads for every little bit of anything that only is unoptimised because laziness and procrastination?[/s]

[MathAndCode]

Why do you need to create a million threads for every little bit of anything that only is unoptimised because laziness and procrastination?

I don't like inefficiency. Which variant of a catalyst has the most potential for occurring naturally isn't always obvious, so we should discuss how to figure it out.

[Hunting]

Why do you need to create a million threads for every little bit of anything that only is unoptimised because laziness and procrastination?

I don't like inefficiency. Which variant of a catalyst has the most potential for occurring naturally isn't always obvious, so we should discuss how to figure it out.

Sorry, but I (and we) don't play the Pointless Optimization Game.