[deleted]
DeepMind Challenges for StarCraft
81–90 of 137 posts
Re: DeepMind Challenges for StarCraft
#82Starcraft is a game that is played with mouse and keyboard (or game controller on console). I think in order to say an AI has beat a human, it should have to use the same interface that a human uses. That's part of the definition of the game. In Go, anyone can place a stone as well as anyone else, it's deciding where to place a stone that's the game. In Starcraft, not everyone can control the interface to the game eq…
[deleted]
Re: DeepMind Challenges for StarCraft
#83Starcraft is a game that is played with mouse and keyboard (or game controller on console). I think in order to say an AI has beat a human, it should have to use the same interface that a human uses. That's part of the definition of the game. In Go, anyone can place a stone as well as anyone else, it's deciding where to place a stone that's the game. In Starcraft, not everyone can control the interface to the game eq…
I think APM should simply be passed as a parameter. Max it out at whatever is the theoretical maximum for a human (how often can the fastest person click buttons). Then you can challenge a player to a game where you offer something like 10% less than their average APM over the last n games.
It would actually be quite interesting to see how much APM actually influences the victory. You can easily test this by having cloned AIs play themselves at different APM values and come up with an added value per added APM measure.
Re: DeepMind Challenges for StarCraft
#84Starcraft is a game that is played with mouse and keyboard (or game controller on console). I think in order to say an AI has beat a human, it should have to use the same interface that a human uses. That's part of the definition of the game. In Go, anyone can place a stone as well as anyone else, it's deciding where to place a stone that's the game. In Starcraft, not everyone can control the interface to the game eq…
Agreed. The DeepMind team have already done this with other Atari games: https://youtu.be/08Cl7ii6viY?t=11m35s (Oct 2015)
"The system only gets raw pixels as input."
The results were pretty great, so it would be fascinating to see this work with Matt's version of SC2 as mentioned elsewhere in this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11326119
Re: DeepMind Challenges for StarCraft
#85Starcraft is a game that is played with mouse and keyboard (or game controller on console). I think in order to say an AI has beat a human, it should have to use the same interface that a human uses. That's part of the definition of the game. In Go, anyone can place a stone as well as anyone else, it's deciding where to place a stone that's the game. In Starcraft, not everyone can control the interface to the game eq…
Agreed. The DeepMind team have already done this with other Atari games: https://youtu.be/08Cl7ii6viY?t=11m35s (Oct 2015) "The system only gets raw pixels as input." The results were pretty great, so it would be fascinating to see this work with Matt's version of SC2 as mentioned elsewhere in this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11326119
I imagine this would be massively more difficult to do with SC2, due to the much higher variation in pixels.
Re: DeepMind Challenges for StarCraft
#86Well, anyone who says that advantage in micromanagement is not a big thing should see "Automaton 2000" videos. Given that automaton is a map script and thus can have virtually unlimited APM, it beats people from a horribly disadvantageous positions (40 banelings vs 21 marine [1], or 100 zerglings vs 20 sieged tanks [2]). [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXUOWXidcY0 [2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKVFZ28ybQs
For Atari games, they limited actions to 50Hz, which is not entirely out of reach for human beings. I guess they would do something similar to make the SC challenge fair as well.
Re: DeepMind Challenges for StarCraft
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not always the case where smaller armies lose to big armies. There are many situations in Starcraft where superior micro of less units can taken on more units. One example is Phoenixes versus mutalisks. For those who don't play, Phoenixes are faster and have slightly longer range than mutalisks. Phoenixes can infinitely shoot and run and kill of mutalisks.
I'm not sure this is true, even with infinite APM micro, and I have a whole of experience microing phoenixes against mutas. Well, maybe after the range upgrade it is.
you're right - the phoenixes will take damage. They'll take virtually nothing with range upgrade. But this 6 v 22 trade off https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6g1GCzJfCKo
Re: DeepMind Challenges for StarCraft
#88Re: DeepMind Challenges for StarCraft
#89Starcraft is a game that is played with mouse and keyboard (or game controller on console). I think in order to say an AI has beat a human, it should have to use the same interface that a human uses. That's part of the definition of the game. In Go, anyone can place a stone as well as anyone else, it's deciding where to place a stone that's the game. In Starcraft, not everyone can control the interface to the game eq…
Limiting the number of APM could be a solution to the bias you mention, especially if the AI eventually manages to beat an expert human player with lower average APM. Of course having a real robot using a mouse and a keyboard would be even better in the long run.
Re: DeepMind Challenges for StarCraft
#90I think poker would also be a great challenge. It is a special game because as well as the math, you also have to understand your opponent and adjust accordingly. It'd be interesting to see weather DeepMind can beat professional poker players who have different playing styles.
> you also have to understand your opponent
This could be a dangerous idea. http://lesswrong.com/lw/x4/nonperson_predicates/