OpenAI at the Dota 2 World Championships • Hacker News Board

Re: OpenAI at the Dota 2 World Championships

#171

Post by eighthCoffee » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 9:59 AM UTC

sondr3 wrote: post #125

thefreeman wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know that they specifically said there was no domain-specific knowledge. iirc they said they didn't "teach it the rules of dota" but they also said the training involved "coaching". I interpret that to include showing the bot useful techniques (like creep blocking) which the AI then learned leads to higher win rates, etc.

They also mentioned that in the beginning the bot figured out that the best way to win was to not play the game (aka hiding in it's own base). Then it started running around wildly, dying to enemy towers in the wrong lanes at the map. So it definitely took some nudging getting it to do something more than being AFK in base.

It doesn't does not need any nudging.

The idea is that first generations run around dying so the optimal response is to just stay put and let the opponent die. This now has basically 100% win rate so both of them do it, lowering it to 50%.

The other part is that there are random variations to the strategy it uses. This it experiments - they won't stay in base forever since that is giving you only 50% winrate (based on whose creeps would push tower first).

This random variation then means that the bot might go out, autoattack a creep wave and then come back to to base. Or anything similar to that.

This new strategy now has almost 100% win rate and the stay in base is no longer viable.

If it went out and died to a tower, it doesn't matter, it can just not use it and there will be period of base AFKing again, but it only takes one improvement (pushing a wave or hitting tower couple times) to make the base AFK obsolete and force new progress.

Re: OpenAI at the Dota 2 World Championships

#172

Post by Shaanie » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 10:00 AM UTC

StavrosK wrote: post #169

sondr3 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They also mentioned that in the beginning the bot figured out that the best way to win was to not play the game (aka hiding in it's own base). Then it started running around wildly, dying to enemy towers in the wrong lanes at the map. So it definitely took some nudging getting it to do something more than being AFK in base.

How did it figure that? There's pretty much no way to win if you're just staying in base.

Barring faction imbalance, there's a 50% chance to win by staying in base. However, I'm not sure how running around and dying could negatively impact your win percentage unless the other bot is also outside of the base.

Re: OpenAI at the Dota 2 World Championships

#173

Post by Shaanie » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 10:10 AM UTC

electrograv wrote: post #121

flunhat wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will consider an A.I. truly intelligent when it passes the Turing test with flying colors. And as a native English speaker, too (not just barely passing by posing as a 13 year old Ukrainian boy with a poor grasp of English, which is what happened last time). As far I know, no A.I. developed has ever met this bar. It seems that the nuances, inconsistencies, and total freedom of language make it a totally different k…

Again, you're moving the goalposts forward whenever AI surpasses them . This time you move the goalposts forward by requiring a proof of native English proficiency. Next time it will be something else; that goalpost will be achieved, and when it is, you will move the goalpost forward yet again. Perhaps you'll require the Turing+++ test be conducted with audio rather than text. Then it will be video. Then a physical a…

Most of those are quite logical though. If you want to say that a general AI has an intelligence equal to or exceeding human intelligence then it should perform reasonably similar to a human at all tasks and in all scenarios.

A human that can solve complex equations in a few seconds would probably be considered highly intelligent, but a machine can do the same in nanoseconds. Would you say a calculator is an intelligent AI?

Re: OpenAI at the Dota 2 World Championships

#174

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 10:13 AM UTC

pcnix wrote: post #161

flunhat wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Turing test is hardly a new measure - it's been around for ~70 years and hasn't been passed yet. But otherwise I agree with what you said - this is just my personal measure of when we'll be in society-shaking territory.

It has been passed, but the definition of passed changes to make the test tougher each time. I think that is what the other poster is talking about.

[deleted]

Re: OpenAI at the Dota 2 World Championships

#175

Post by StavrosK » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 10:23 AM UTC

Shaanie wrote: post #172

StavrosK wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did it figure that? There's pretty much no way to win if you're just staying in base.

Barring faction imbalance, there's a 50% chance to win by staying in base. However, I'm not sure how running around and dying could negatively impact your win percentage unless the other bot is also outside of the base.

I don't understand what you mean. If you stay in base, the opponent won't, and will quickly win the game.

Re: OpenAI at the Dota 2 World Championships

#176

Post by kayoone » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 10:29 AM UTC

jmkapz wrote: post #84

I wonder if this a good move for Valve. How many people will be loose interest from the game if next year OpenAI manages to pull off the 5v5 challenge, thus bringing DotA 2 to the same level as GO and chess for AI, i.e. beating the best human(s). Has there been any study on the popularity of chess after AI moved in? How about prize pools, as a large driving force of DotA 2 is the competitive scene? I suppose Valve wi…

imo that will have zero impact. For humans it is still much more entertaining to see other humans play and seeing the best human players is far more exciting than a perfect AI. Chess did not loose any popularity just because no one can beat the machine. If anything, humans might derive new and interesting tactics and playingstyles from AIs and use them as training partners.

Human Entertainment is one of the few areas where i don't see AI taking jobs anytime soon, because that removes a lot of the entertainment value.

Re: OpenAI at the Dota 2 World Championships

#177

Post by Zarath » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 10:30 AM UTC

pcnix wrote: post #160

Swizec wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I hate those games, because the moment you become human, and try to do something intuitive but undefined and unwanted by the programmers, you get penalized. That's what I loved about Ultima Online. Characters were basically "Here are 100 possible skills to learn and 5 base stats. You get 700 points to distribute among your skills. Good luck" My fav part was that doing things that require strength made you stronger,…

Have you tried Path of Exile? You might enjoy it.

+1 for PoE. The only reason I don't play is because I can't stop when I do.

Re: OpenAI at the Dota 2 World Championships

#178

Post by tinco » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 10:35 AM UTC

Shaanie wrote: post #172

StavrosK wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did it figure that? There's pretty much no way to win if you're just staying in base.

Barring faction imbalance, there's a 50% chance to win by staying in base. However, I'm not sure how running around and dying could negatively impact your win percentage unless the other bot is also outside of the base.

You might (if timed correctly) steal aggro from your creep wave which will lead you to win the game if the other hero is AFK.

You might also pull aggro from their creep wave, which I think should also win you the game in most circumstances.

Re: OpenAI at the Dota 2 World Championships

#179

Post by tinco » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 10:36 AM UTC

StavrosK wrote: post #175

Shaanie wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Barring faction imbalance, there's a 50% chance to win by staying in base. However, I'm not sure how running around and dying could negatively impact your win percentage unless the other bot is also outside of the base.

I don't understand what you mean. If you stay in base, the opponent won't, and will quickly win the game.

This is during the training phase, the opponent will be a similarily trained AI.

Re: OpenAI at the Dota 2 World Championships

#180

Post by ralfd » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 10:37 AM UTC

pcnix wrote: post #161

flunhat wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Turing test is hardly a new measure - it's been around for ~70 years and hasn't been passed yet. But otherwise I agree with what you said - this is just my personal measure of when we'll be in society-shaking territory.

It has been passed, but the definition of passed changes to make the test tougher each time. I think that is what the other poster is talking about.

Has it been passed? Turings original paper assumes adults conversing intelligently. That is the spirit of the test. Not a clever hack of the rules, like posing as a child which doesn't speak english.

This is the $20000 long bet from 2002 between Kapor and Kurzweil:

http://longbets.org/1/#terms

> Ray Kurzweil maintains that a computer (i.e., a machine intelligence) will pass the Turing test by 2029. Mitchell Kapor believes this will not happen.