Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Exploring new forms of chess using artificial intelligence

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 139 posts

Re: Exploring new forms of chess using artificial intelligence

#71

Post by warrenq »

gowld wrote: post #67
monsieurbanana wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually expect computers to do much better on a game with a lot of randomness, since it then becomes statistics. Genres that would be difficult: - any game based on recognizing images (the first example that pops in my mind is codenames) - social deduction like werewolf

Codenames is easyfor an all-computer team; it's simply a word vector problem. There are already AIs published. Pictionary might be harder.

dude, get with the program :) https://quickdraw.withgoogle.com/

Re: Exploring new forms of chess using artificial intelligence

#72

Post by warrenq »

scotty79 wrote: post #57
keiferski wrote: post #27

Question for those knowledgeable on AI: what sort of game would be easy for a human to understand, but difficult or impossible for a computer to play or easily defeat humans? I imagine one based purely on randomness, like dice, would be one. I remember reading somewhere that languages like Finnish and Hungarian are difficult for computers to parse, [1] due to their agglutinative grammatical structure. Not sure if tha…

Dodgeball. Cup stacking. Or any other game that requires bipedal movement or quick and precise adaptive manual manipulation.

dodgeball is solved

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHTizZ_XcUM

Re: Exploring new forms of chess using artificial intelligence

#73

Post by mellosouls »

keiferski wrote: post #27

Question for those knowledgeable on AI: what sort of game would be easy for a human to understand, but difficult or impossible for a computer to play or easily defeat humans? I imagine one based purely on randomness, like dice, would be one. I remember reading somewhere that languages like Finnish and Hungarian are difficult for computers to parse, [1] due to their agglutinative grammatical structure. Not sure if tha…

This is a really interesting - and I think, important - question although people ruling stuff out of bounds for AI do have a habit of becoming proven wrong - the classic recent example being Go.

My assumption would be games or activities that are NOT heavily based in pattern finding, maths, statistics, categorising, memory etc.

I think it is more useful perhaps to consider the motivation for game playing which is completely different (at present) for humans/animals compared to computers.

We play because it is fun, or to bond, or to improve social status, make money, whatever.

Computers play because that is what they are told to do.

Re: Exploring new forms of chess using artificial intelligence

#74

Post by misja111 »

rmrfrmrf wrote: post #65

An important piece of context here is that making a living by playing chess competitively is close to nil, so many even top players like Kramnik end up taking consulting/PR jobs like this in order to pay the bills. I have a hard time believing Kramnik actually believes (or said directly) that AI ruined chess. My read is that he's not really promoting changes to the rules of chess as much as he's trying to build suppo…

> Chess beauty now is less about flashy combinations and more about qualities of a position

No it's the opposite. Since the advent of strong computer programs it has become clear that there are tactical intricacies in lots of positions that have long been overlooked by everyone, including top players. Gambits that everyone thought should not be accepted because it would give away a too strong positional advantage turned out to be winnable by clever defence moves. End games that were thought to be draws turned out to be winnable by although sometimes it would take more than 100 moves. The bottom line is that the tactical part of chess is deeper than most people thought.

Re: Exploring new forms of chess using artificial intelligence

#75

Post by klmadfejno »

throwaway49990 wrote: post #49
keiferski wrote: post #27

Question for those knowledgeable on AI: what sort of game would be easy for a human to understand, but difficult or impossible for a computer to play or easily defeat humans? I imagine one based purely on randomness, like dice, would be one. I remember reading somewhere that languages like Finnish and Hungarian are difficult for computers to parse, [1] due to their agglutinative grammatical structure. Not sure if tha…

Try Magic: the Gathering. >I remember reading somewhere that languages like Finnish and Hungarian are difficult for computers to parse I wonder how much of that is due to AI researchers being speakers of Indo-European languages and not being able to wrap their mind around languages outside that family

Hmm, that's going to be a maybe.

If the AI needs to interpret the rules of a card based on it's text and figure out how to use them, it would indeed be a very difficult challenge.

If the AI can simply learn how to play the game with a predefined deck, it'll probably do just fine, outperforming humans but not all the time due to random chance.

Re: Exploring new forms of chess using artificial intelligence

#76

Post by david927 »

sasaf5 wrote: post #40

A summary to undo the clickbait: AI is making chess beautiful by making it easy to check how new rules affect playability. Rule changes suggested in the article are: - No castling - Allowing self capture - Pawns can move sideways - Pawns can move 2 squares at a time

The rare occasions that I played against my wife and tried to castle, she rejected it outright with, "No fancy moves!"

Re: Exploring new forms of chess using artificial intelligence

#77

Post by klmadfejno »

exDM69 wrote: post #42
keiferski wrote: post #27

Question for those knowledgeable on AI: what sort of game would be easy for a human to understand, but difficult or impossible for a computer to play or easily defeat humans? I imagine one based purely on randomness, like dice, would be one. I remember reading somewhere that languages like Finnish and Hungarian are difficult for computers to parse, [1] due to their agglutinative grammatical structure. Not sure if tha…

Not the answer you're looking for, but motor racing and simulations of it. Sounds counter intuitive, but despite doing fast laps when on the circuit alone, even the best AI racers have difficulty surviving a race distance in close pack racing without crashing. Roborace, the autonomous racing league in development has barely managed to put two cars on track and doing an overtake safely. A lot of money and state of the…

I get that this is true of real cars, but is it really true of simulated cars? Can you share an example?

Re: Exploring new forms of chess using artificial intelligence

#78

Post by jordiburgos »

WalterBright wrote: post #11

When I was in college, a Monopoly game appeared on the DEC-10. Playing that for a while completely ruined the game for me. Then someone wrote a bot to play ADVENT, which ruined that, too. My ability to play chess declined precipitously after I learned how to program, because while thinking of my next move I'd always digress into how to design a program to do the work for me. I originally wrote the Empire game because…

That happens to me a lot of times when playing board games. I tend to start designing the software to play it instead of actually play. So it breaks my concentration in the game.

Re: Exploring new forms of chess using artificial intelligence

#79

Post by jayparth »

misja111 wrote: post #74
rmrfrmrf wrote: post #65

An important piece of context here is that making a living by playing chess competitively is close to nil, so many even top players like Kramnik end up taking consulting/PR jobs like this in order to pay the bills. I have a hard time believing Kramnik actually believes (or said directly) that AI ruined chess. My read is that he's not really promoting changes to the rules of chess as much as he's trying to build suppo…

> Chess beauty now is less about flashy combinations and more about qualities of a position No it's the opposite. Since the advent of strong computer programs it has become clear that there are tactical intricacies in lots of positions that have long been overlooked by everyone, including top players. Gambits that everyone thought should not be accepted because it would give away a too strong positional advantage tur…

Well I agree with your first example.

But would you call someone who wins a supposedly drawn endgame after 100 moves a tactical player or positional player? No one I know would claim that what happened on the 100th move was a tactic. It was 90+ moves of jockeying for position.

Re: Exploring new forms of chess using artificial intelligence

#80

Post by tanjtanjtanj »

tjah1087 wrote: post #39
keiferski wrote: post #27

Question for those knowledgeable on AI: what sort of game would be easy for a human to understand, but difficult or impossible for a computer to play or easily defeat humans? I imagine one based purely on randomness, like dice, would be one. I remember reading somewhere that languages like Finnish and Hungarian are difficult for computers to parse, [1] due to their agglutinative grammatical structure. Not sure if tha…

Any game built around word play or humour. E.g. "I'm sorry I haven't a Clue"[1] or something like Cards Against Humanity. Though I imagine someone is trying to apply GPT-3 to these sorts of games already. Beyond that, any sort of narrative based RPG or exploration game (e.g. legend of Zelda) would be hard to do 'properly', i.e. without scripting a bot. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%27m_Sorry_I_Haven%27t_a_Cl.…

Actually, I'd wager that Cards Against Humanity would be one of the games a model would be best at over a human. There are only a limited number of white cards that could work with any given black card and it could fairly quickly bucket a player into certain types most likely to pick certain cards. Would it be perfect? No, but that's the nature of the game and with only seven options and no branching paths it doesn't seem like a stretch to say a trained model can trivially beat an average player and challenge a more "advanced" player.
Post reply on HN