Similarly, the overlap is measured as the integral of product of oscillator strengths for all four materials of a simulated spectrum. This can be visualized in ESI Fig. . The smear, which blurs the intensities of the peaks, was examined across 0.04, 0.08, and 0.12 eV. Using the same initial population, GA 5 was run with each of these smears, resulting in different top scoring pairs. However, the smear of 0.08 eV gave the best balance of optimizing the fitness score and similarity to experimental absorption peak widths Fig. ). To examine whether the magnitude of absorption and overlap terms affected the scores, another instance of GA 5 was run using a fitness function with normalized terms. The resulting GA produced the same top performers, indicating that our original simple scoring equation can be used. Eqn 2 is a simplified version; in the actual fitness function, each combination of materials had their overlap calculated separately and summed to avoid any errors. Issues could have arose in instances where at least two materials absorbed at the same wavelength, and another material had zero absorption. If all four material's oscillator strengths were multiplied to yield the overlap at that wavelength, it would produce a result of 0 when in reality, there is some overlap that is unintentionally neglected.