That's ~11k hours of training data
Minecraft diamond challenge leaves AI creators stumped
81–90 of 113 posts
Re: Minecraft diamond challenge leaves AI creators stumped
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The trend in machine learning right now is to try and solve problems "from scratch" by training "end-to-end", which means without any prior knowledge. In a strong sense, this implies ML is not "intelligent" in any conventional sense of the word. What little we have of understanding of learning and intelligence in the scope of humans strongly implies that drawing parallels with solutions to other tasks, building on…
> In a strong sense, this implies ML is not "intelligent" in any conventional sense of the word. I don’t know why people have so much faith in ML and AI. Considering what a CPU actually does, shouldn’t the default position be one of skepticism? It’d be truly amazing if you can make a machine intelligent in the human sense by merely coming up with a clever algorithm.
Or we could flip your question around:
Considering what a neuron actually does, shouldn't the default position be that the brain is a computer?
Re: Minecraft diamond challenge leaves AI creators stumped
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A good AI for a game like Civilization would have knowledge of human social concepts like honor and vindictiveness, This is a pretty wild assumption to say the least.
I'm very curious why you're so skeptical of this. The AI that was created for the Civilization games did in fact try to model these and similar aspects of human behavior, with the intent of creating AIs that played in ways humans would consider natural or fitting. They named the AIs after historical humans and tried to make the AIs act in ways that would be perceived as similar to their namesakes. Nuke-happy Gandhi w…
It's pretty damn easy to pin down "parameters for loyalty, forgiveness, propensity towards warmongering, and more" (in fact, they already pinned them down) while making the AI smart enough to not leave lucrative resources unimproved, and not smash waves and waves of units into a walled city with +30 strength.
Re: Minecraft diamond challenge leaves AI creators stumped
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm very curious why you're so skeptical of this. The AI that was created for the Civilization games did in fact try to model these and similar aspects of human behavior, with the intent of creating AIs that played in ways humans would consider natural or fitting. They named the AIs after historical humans and tried to make the AIs act in ways that would be perceived as similar to their namesakes. Nuke-happy Gandhi w…
It's pretty damn easy to pin down "parameters for loyalty, forgiveness, propensity towards warmongering, and more" (in fact, they already pinned them down) while making the AI smart enough to not leave lucrative resources unimproved, and not smash waves and waves of units into a walled city with +30 strength.
The problem is that not all combinations of those traits are equally valid, and the optimal distributions of those traits are ill defined. If warmongering is some number 0 to 1, with 0 being Gandhi and 1 being Genghis Khan, that's all fine and good. But what does the distribution curve of a randomly generated nation leader look like and how well does that curve conform to the expectations and perceptions of the player? You can't assume independence; players likely expect a high-warmonger/low-forgiveness leader to be more common than a high-warmonger/high-forgiveness leader, but the later combination shouldn't be strictly forbidden. Rather than pinning down all these curves, the Civilization series leans on a finite number of hand-crafted AI players, created by humans exercising intuition and instinct.
As for tactical AI (which is only one component of Civilization), an optimal play from the AI probably isn't what most players desire, nor is optimal play with randomly imposed inefficiencies. Real humans don't run countries optimally, so an AI that runs a Civilization nation optimally won't ring true. You want an AI that rarely makes mistakes that a human wouldn't make, but frequently makes mistakes that a human would make.
Making a good AI for a game like Civ is not nearly as straight forward as creating an AI for a game like Chess or Go because players have different expectations from the games.
Re: Minecraft diamond challenge leaves AI creators stumped
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In a strong sense, this implies ML is not "intelligent" in any conventional sense of the word. I don’t know why people have so much faith in ML and AI. Considering what a CPU actually does, shouldn’t the default position be one of skepticism? It’d be truly amazing if you can make a machine intelligent in the human sense by merely coming up with a clever algorithm.
Or we could flip your question around: Considering what a neuron actually does, shouldn't the default position be that the brain is a computer?
How certain are we of what neurons and other building blocks of the brain actually do?
Re: Minecraft diamond challenge leaves AI creators stumped
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's pretty damn easy to pin down "parameters for loyalty, forgiveness, propensity towards warmongering, and more" (in fact, they already pinned them down) while making the AI smart enough to not leave lucrative resources unimproved, and not smash waves and waves of units into a walled city with +30 strength.
The problem is that not all combinations of those traits are equally valid, and the optimal distributions of those traits are ill defined. If warmongering is some number 0 to 1, with 0 being Gandhi and 1 being Genghis Khan, that's all fine and good. But what does the distribution curve of a randomly generated nation leader look like and how well does that curve conform to the expectations and perceptions of the playe…
> As for tactical AI (which is only one component of Civilization), an optimal play from the AI probably isn't what most players desire, nor is optimal play with randomly imposed inefficiencies.
No one's demanding optimal play from AI. Meanwhile I'm sure pretty much no one's happy with idiotic AI, which is what we have at the moment. I already gave an example: "smashing waves and waves of units into a walled city with +30 strength." Any human player familiar with the rules won't sink 100 city-turns worth of production over 20 turns into attacking an unconquerable city, losing everything while shaving 20% off the wall, then repeat that for another 40 turns; that's idiotic, and that's exactly how the AI behaves alarmingly often. Do you enjoy dealing with this kind of behavior? I bet you don't, unless you only derive pleasure from crushing AIs (which I do enjoy, but the satisfaction from the lack of challenge only lasts so long).
Currently game difficulty in Civ is basically defined by how much of a head start AI players have and how much they cheat (which in theory is a consistent advantage throughout the game but in reality matters less and less once the human player starts conquering), so once you overcome your early disadvantages the late game becomes boring.
> Making a good AI for a game like Civ is not nearly as straight forward...
I never said it's easy to create a great AI for Civ. However, it shouldn't be hard to outdo the existing, idiotic AI by a huge margin (while preserving all the traits like nuke-happiness) if, say, DeepMind decides to put some resources into it.
Re: Minecraft diamond challenge leaves AI creators stumped
#87Y'all got any of them AIs for turned based strategy games? Seriously, I'm starting to think turn based strategy games like Civilization, etc, will be the last to get any attention. Why? We need good AIs for these games and they're not yet solved as far as I know. Furthermore, you don't have to model the human interface by limiting actions per second like with DotA or StarCraft. Yes, we solved Go, but turn based strat…
> Seriously, I'm starting to think turn based strategy games like Civilization, etc, will be the last to get any attention. Why? I don't think the answer is technical. A good AI for a game like Civilization would have knowledge of human social concepts like honor and vindictiveness, which are both concepts problematic to pin down. The definitions of concepts like these are fluid, they change with the times and societ…
> if you're shooting for human-like behavior
You're not though, you're just trying to build a bot that can win the game.
Re: Minecraft diamond challenge leaves AI creators stumped
#88From what I hear, diamonds are located at random, at Y levels 0-15. The terrain is usually at Y level 50-60. So digging is required. The best strategy is to dig on levels 12-15, to avoid lava pools which are on 0-11.
Not sure if the AI can toggle the debug menu, which shows the Y level, or if it can see the Y level during training.
Is this a job well suited to AI, vs a canned algorithm?
Re: Minecraft diamond challenge leaves AI creators stumped
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In a strong sense, this implies ML is not "intelligent" in any conventional sense of the word. I don’t know why people have so much faith in ML and AI. Considering what a CPU actually does, shouldn’t the default position be one of skepticism? It’d be truly amazing if you can make a machine intelligent in the human sense by merely coming up with a clever algorithm.
Or we could flip your question around: Considering what a neuron actually does, shouldn't the default position be that the brain is a computer?
No, because you’re being reductive. Biological organisms are clearly not like silicon computers.
Maybe biologist come up with the next big break through. I mean, if you want to match an organically grown organism ...
Re: Minecraft diamond challenge leaves AI creators stumped
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's kind of the point. The trend in machine learning right now is to try and solve problems "from scratch" by training "end-to-end", which means without any prior knowledge. For example, DeepMind's last three or so iterations of their Alpha-X architecture for game playing did not even have any prior knowledge of the rules of the games they tackled (chess, shoggi, go and Atari games) and were trained entirely throu…
> The trend in machine learning right now is to try and solve problems "from scratch" by training "end-to-end", which means without any prior knowledge. In a strong sense, this implies ML is not "intelligent" in any conventional sense of the word. What little we have of understanding of learning and intelligence in the scope of humans strongly implies that drawing parallels with solutions to other tasks, building on…
They do build on previous knowledge. That’s literally what the training is doing.
It’s just easier, engineering wise, to start over from scratch on each iteration. And it makes it easier to evaluate how each change improves the outcome or not.