Cells in stress-sharing embryo moved average Euclidean distance ~2500 units until gen 400 then ~2400; without-sharing moved ~200 units (30x30 grid)

Entities in the same semantic neighborhood but without a typed relation to this one — candidates for new edges or unrecognized duplicates.

• In stress-sharing embryo, average stress reduced to zero at step 40 during sequential target morphogenesis; without-sharing stress settled at non-zero with <55 cells movingfinding0.860
  Shows stress sharing allows perfect formation of part-by-part target patterns.
• Stress-sharing enables cell movement over longer distances (~2500 units vs ~200 units without sharing).finding0.854
  Stress-sharing cells moved average Euclidean distance of ~2500 units, vs ~200 units in non-sharing populations.
• Radius of influence in embryo with stress sharing: 30 units at step 1 decreasing to 0 at step 85; without sharing: 5 at step 1 ceasing at step 10finding0.842
  Direct measurement of cognitive light cone enlargement by stress sharing.
• Stress-sharing increases radius of cellular influence: ~30 units avg (step 1) vs ~5 units (non-sharing); lasts 85 steps vs 10 steps.finding0.835
• Stress-sharing embryo utilized maximum competency of 4725 units until generation 400, then dropped to ~4500; without-sharing used ~100 unitsfinding0.821
  Links competency utilization to stress sharing and morphological success.
• Stress-sharing embryos achieve perfect sequential target patterns; non-sharing limited to <1% improvement.finding0.817
  Stress-sharing embryos formed each sequential target with stress reducing to zero; non-sharing achieved only tiny improvements.
• Stress sharing benefit scales with grid complexity (20x20, 30x30, 50x50) and becomes more pronounced in later evolutionary stages when mutations alone failfinding0.802
• Stress sharing populations reached target morphology by generation 400, significantly faster than hardwired (1000) or without-sharing populationsfinding0.798