📝 Add comprehensive README with algorithm explanation

- Explain diffusion evolution concept with accessible foggy room analogy
- Include quick start guide with code examples and configuration options
- Document benchmark suite usage for parameter tuning
- Add technical deep dive with step-by-step algorithm breakdown and equations
- Reference the source paper (arXiv:2410.02543)

Author: dariocazzani

README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,221 @@
+# Devol
+
+**Diffusion Evolution** - What if evolution worked like image generation?
+
+## What Is This?
+
+Traditional evolutionary algorithms create new solutions by *copying and mutating* successful ones. Devol does something different: it starts with pure noise and *denoises* toward good solutions, guided by fitness.
+
+The core idea: instead of asking "what should the children of good solutions look like?", we ask "given this random noise, what good solution could it have come from?"
+
+This reframing gives us an algorithm that naturally transitions from broad exploration to precise optimization - without any special tuning.
+
+**The intuition**: Imagine you're in a foggy room full of people, each standing at a different elevation. You can only see your immediate neighbors through the fog. To find the highest point, you don't just copy the person next to you - you look at everyone nearby, weight them by height, and move toward the weighted average. As the fog clears (denoising), your steps become smaller and more precise.
+
+## Quick Start
+
+```python
+import numpy as np
+from devol import DiffusionEvolution, DiffusionConfig
+
+# Define what you're optimizing
+def sphere(x: np.ndarray) -> float:
+    """Simple sphere function - maximum at origin."""
+    return -np.sum(x ** 2)
+
+# Configure the algorithm
+config = DiffusionConfig(
+    population_size=128,
+    num_steps=100,
+    param_dim=10,
+    sigma_m=0.5,
+)
+
+# Run evolution
+algo = DiffusionEvolution(config, sphere)
+algo.run(initial_population=None)
+
+# Get results
+best_solution, best_fitness = algo.get_best_individual()
+print(f"Best fitness: {best_fitness:.6f}")
+```
+
+### Configuration Options
+
+| Parameter | Description | Default |
+|-----------|-------------|---------|
+| `population_size` | Number of candidate solutions | 512 |
+| `num_steps` | Denoising iterations | 50 |
+| `param_dim` | Dimensionality of search space | (required) |
+| `sigma_m` | Mutation scale [0, 1] | 1.0 |
+| `schedule.type` | `linear`, `cosine`, or `ddpm` | `cosine` |
+| `fitness.mapping` | How fitness converts to weights | `direct` |
+| `fitness.temperature` | Sharpness of fitness weighting | 1.0 |
+
+### Using YAML Configuration
+
+```python
+from devol import DiffusionEvolution
+from devol.config import DiffusionConfig
+from pydantic_yaml import parse_yaml_file_as
+
+config = parse_yaml_file_as(DiffusionConfig, "config.yaml")
+algo = DiffusionEvolution(config, your_fitness_function)
+```
+
+Example `config.yaml`:
+```yaml
+population_size: 256
+num_steps: 200
+param_dim: 32
+sigma_m: 0.5
+schedule:
+  type: cosine
+  epsilon: 0.0001
+fitness:
+  mapping: exponential
+  temperature: 2.0
+  normalize: min_max
+```
+
+## Benchmarks
+
+The benchmark suite helps you understand how different configurations perform on challenging optimization landscapes.
+
+### Why Benchmark?
+
+Different problems favor different settings:
+- **Multimodal landscapes** (many local optima): May need higher `sigma_m` and more steps
+- **High-dimensional spaces**: May need larger populations
+- **Smooth landscapes**: Can often use fewer steps with aggressive schedules
+
+The benchmarks use the **Rastrigin function** - a notoriously difficult test case with a global optimum surrounded by a regular grid of local optima. If your configuration works on Rastrigin, it has a fighting chance on real problems.
+
+### Running Benchmarks
+
+```bash
+uv run -m benchmark.main
+```
+
+This runs a grid search across:
+- **Schedule types**: linear, cosine, ddpm
+- **Population sizes**: 64, 128, 256
+- **Steps**: 64, 128, 256, 512
+- **Dimensions**: 8, 16, 32, 64
+- **Mutation scales**: 0.2, 0.5, 0.8, 1.0
+
+Results are saved to `benchmark_results/` with visualizations showing:
+- Best fitness achieved per configuration
+- How different schedules compare
+- The effect of population size vs. steps tradeoffs
+
+### Custom Benchmarks
+
+```python
+from benchmark import GridSearchRunner
+
+def your_objective(x):
+    # Your fitness function here
+    return score
+
+runner = GridSearchRunner(
+    fitness_fn=your_objective,
+    schedule_types=["cosine", "ddpm"],
+    population_sizes=[128, 256],
+    num_steps_list=[100, 200],
+    param_dims=[16],
+    sigma_m_values=[0.5, 0.8],
+    seeds=[42, 123],
+)
+
+results = runner.run(verbose=True)
+```
+
+The runner uses multiprocessing to parallelize experiments across CPU cores.
+
+---
+
+## How It Actually Works
+
+If you're curious about the mechanics, here's the full story.
+
+### The Diffusion Perspective
+
+The key insight: if you add enough random noise to any population of solutions, they all become indistinguishable - just random static. The magic is in *reversing* that process.
+
+- **Forward process**: Take good solutions and gradually add noise until they're unrecognizable
+- **Reverse process**: Start with pure noise and gradually remove it, guided by fitness
+
+The reverse process is where evolution happens. At each step, we ask: "Given this noisy solution, what did the *clean* solution probably look like?" And we answer using two signals:
+
+1. **Fitness**: Better solutions should be more likely origins
+2. **Proximity**: Solutions that are closer in parameter space are more relevant
+
+This is captured in a beautifully simple equation. To estimate what a noisy point `xₜ` originally was, we compute a weighted average:
+
+```
+x̂₀ = Σ (fitness_weight × proximity_weight × candidate) / normalization
+```
+
+Each candidate solution contributes based on both how good it is *and* how close it is to the noisy observation. This creates a kind of "gravitational pull" toward high-fitness regions, but filtered through local structure.
+
+### Why Proximity Matters
+
+The proximity weighting is the secret sauce. In traditional evolution, a mutation in New York affects a solution in Tokyo with the same probability. In diffusion evolution, the influence is local - solutions only "see" their neighbors.
+
+This means:
+- **Early iterations** (high noise): Large-scale structure emerges, populations cluster toward promising regions
+- **Late iterations** (low noise): Fine-grained optimization, solutions converge precisely to peaks
+
+The algorithm naturally transitions from exploration to exploitation without any explicit scheduling.
+
+### The Algorithm Step by Step
+
+Here's what happens at each denoising step:
+
+**Step 1: Estimate the clean solution**
+
+For each noisy solution `xₜ`, we estimate what it was before noise was added:
+
+```
+x̂₀ = (1/Z) Σ g[f(x)] × N(xₜ; √αₜ·x, 1-αₜ) × x
+```
+
+where:
+- `g[f(x)]` is a fitness-based weight (fitter solutions contribute more)
+- `N(...)` is a Gaussian that weights by proximity
+- `Z` normalizes everything
+
+**Step 2: Compute the predicted noise**
+
+```
+ε̂ = (xₜ - √αₜ · x̂₀) / √(1-αₜ)
+```
+
+This is the noise we think was added to get from `x̂₀` to `xₜ`.
+
+**Step 3: Take the evolution step**
+
+```
+xₜ₋₁ = √αₜ₋₁ · x̂₀ + direction_term · ε̂ + σₜ · noise
+```
+
+We move toward our estimate of the clean solution, partially preserving the predicted noise direction, and add fresh stochasticity controlled by `σₜ`.
+
+### The Noise Schedule
+
+The parameter `αₜ` controls how much "signal" remains at step `t`:
+- `αₜ = 1`: Pure signal, no noise
+- `αₜ = 0`: Pure noise, no signal
+
+The schedule (linear, cosine, or DDPM) determines how quickly we transition. Cosine schedules spend more time in the middle range where interesting structure emerges.
+
+## References
+
+This implementation is based on:
+
+> **Diffusion Models are Evolutionary Algorithms**
+> arXiv:2410.02543
+> https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.02543
+
+The paper establishes the theoretical connection between diffusion models and evolutionary computation, showing that the iterative denoising process can be interpreted as fitness-guided evolution with proximity-aware selection.