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

Mastering Stratego

deepmind.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 128 posts

Re: Mastering Stratego

#31

Post by pbronez »

runarberg wrote: post #27
dr_faustus wrote: post #20

Call me a cynic but the fact that after almost 10 years of AI hype we are still working our way down the list of popular board games is a bit of a downer for me. I mean, having AIs to play Stratego, Risk, Go, Diplomacy and what have you against sure is nice. But there are literally billions of dollars spent on these projects and I really come to the point where I just don't believe anymore that the current AI approac…

There was a time when I thought that maybe there was something more to AI then a fancy statistical model when you need to fit non-linear data. But I’m solidly on the belief now that AI is precisely a very powerful statistical tool. I honestly think there was never any real strategy of getting AI to anything more then specialized learning for deeper inference using a lot of computational power. Don’t get me wrong, usi…

I’m not an AGI fanboy. I agree that the current line of inquiry (ie deep learning) won’t get us there. I think neurosymbolic reasoning is needed. That work is still nascent, and worse, we don’t have great ways to connect our current paradigm to it.

Re: Mastering Stratego

#32

Post by clolege »

VHRanger wrote: post #29
clolege wrote: post #13

It's interesting to watch the videos they link of deepmind playing against the top-level Stratego masters [0]. I usually find Stratego to be a bit of a dull game (less elegant and more drawn out than Go and chess), but I'm a sucker for watching top-level AIs play. Its skills for bluffing are both fascinating and a bit scary. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaUdWoSMjSY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-9ZXmyNKgs h…

FWIW one of the big things poker AI taught humans is massive overbets (eg. going all in for $200 over a $15 pot). This is scary to do well in practice, because the mathematically optimal bluff frequency approaches 50% as you increase the overbet size.

Wow, that's crazy.

It seems like it would be easier for AI to do, since it doesn't have any tells (it's easier to have a poker face when you don't have a face at all).

I remember playing poker as a kid, and experimenting with pretending like my cards were good/bad with body language. I don't think that any professional players use that approach (they just have sunglasses and a straight face), but I wonder if AI could beat humans even more consistently if it developed a way to convey tells and fake tells?

Re: Mastering Stratego

#33

Post by machina_ex_deus »

dtdynasty wrote: post #23
machina_ex_deus wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's from things like properly last hitting creeps, good reaction timing, good reaction decisions, coordinating real time actions with teammates in milliseconds resolution. It's obviously not about clicking fast, but it is about timing, sometimes 100 milliseconds reaction time make huge difference in outcome. It is usually making decisions on very small time scales. Do you retreat or continue? Use ability or hold it?…

There are larger strategic decisions that are significant in dota. Which area of the map to play, which objectives are important and when, what type of fights will we win (fast and bursty) and when will we take them. Often times these are thought of at the beginning of the game and effect gameplay throughout.

That's pretty tactical decisions, usually made in a time window of like 20-30 seconds top. Takes like 40 second to reach more than half the map from the base. Fighting decisions usually also get tactical. I would say that 90% of the game deciding decisions have a time window of less than 30 seconds to make. 70% are in a time window of seconds. You don't make a strategic decision to fight ever, you make tactical decision when the map looks fitting. If you take strategic fights because of long term strategy (instead of deciding tactically) in Dota you will lose.

Re: Mastering Stratego

#34

Post by fragmede »

dr_faustus wrote: post #20

Call me a cynic but the fact that after almost 10 years of AI hype we are still working our way down the list of popular board games is a bit of a downer for me. I mean, having AIs to play Stratego, Risk, Go, Diplomacy and what have you against sure is nice. But there are literally billions of dollars spent on these projects and I really come to the point where I just don't believe anymore that the current AI approac…

Enterprise deployments. When IBM's Watson gets deployed to run your building's elevator scheduling, we don't hear about it. Nor do we really hear about AI powering hospital backend systems. Or eg fraud modeling at Visa. Twitter assuredly was doing ML on their backend as well.

Re: Mastering Stratego

#35

Post by Minor49er »

dr_faustus wrote: post #20

Call me a cynic but the fact that after almost 10 years of AI hype we are still working our way down the list of popular board games is a bit of a downer for me. I mean, having AIs to play Stratego, Risk, Go, Diplomacy and what have you against sure is nice. But there are literally billions of dollars spent on these projects and I really come to the point where I just don't believe anymore that the current AI approac…

The AI hype has been around for much longer than 10 years. Ray Kurzweil's book "The Singularity is Near" was first published in 2005. Deep Blue beat Garry Kasparov in 1997

Re: Mastering Stratego

#36

Post by gcanyon »

waprin wrote: post #4

Great article. I played Stratego a lot as a kid and it always felt simpler than chess, go , or poker so it’s surprising it’s a much bigger game tree unless you stop and think. I’m curious about the comparisons to poker. I know the hot algorithm in poker solvers is counter factual regret minimization. The article indicates that the feedback cycle is too long for those algorithms to work but I’d be curious to learn mor…

The "complexity" of a game is not very well measured by game-tree size alone. Wikipedia lists multiple factors on the game complexity page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_complexity#Measures_of_ga...

Re: Mastering Stratego

#37

Post by 10xDev »

zaptrem wrote: post #25
dr_faustus wrote: post #20

Call me a cynic but the fact that after almost 10 years of AI hype we are still working our way down the list of popular board games is a bit of a downer for me. I mean, having AIs to play Stratego, Risk, Go, Diplomacy and what have you against sure is nice. But there are literally billions of dollars spent on these projects and I really come to the point where I just don't believe anymore that the current AI approac…

Have you tried this out yet? https://chat.openai.com/ It's been providing real value to me over the past day for practicing Spanish, explaining Machine Learning concepts, and doing fancy write-ups in LaTeX. And this one can't even use Google yet! (other research teams have already created models capable of doing so, it's only a matter of time until these innovations are brought together in one place)

That's a fancy wikipedia chatbot. Nothing to do with generalisation.

Re: Mastering Stratego

#38

Post by TecoAndJix »

_HMCB_ wrote: post #6
waprin wrote: post #4

Great article. I played Stratego a lot as a kid and it always felt simpler than chess, go , or poker so it’s surprising it’s a much bigger game tree unless you stop and think. I’m curious about the comparisons to poker. I know the hot algorithm in poker solvers is counter factual regret minimization. The article indicates that the feedback cycle is too long for those algorithms to work but I’d be curious to learn mor…

I played it too. My goodness what a blast from the past. To be honest, none of my friends liked to play. I mostly played by myself it seems. LOL.

I had star wars stratego that i played where they reversed the number values. It was characters from the OG trilogy and episode 1. takes me back! $80 on amazon for that version :(

Re: Mastering Stratego

#39

Post by 10xDev »

dr_faustus wrote: post #20

Call me a cynic but the fact that after almost 10 years of AI hype we are still working our way down the list of popular board games is a bit of a downer for me. I mean, having AIs to play Stratego, Risk, Go, Diplomacy and what have you against sure is nice. But there are literally billions of dollars spent on these projects and I really come to the point where I just don't believe anymore that the current AI approac…

There is work on zero-shot learning and on procedurally generated environments like Procgen but it doesn't go mainstream because the results aren't as cool to most as some new record on a known board game or video game.

Re: Mastering Stratego

#40

Post by throwup »

clolege wrote: post #13

It's interesting to watch the videos they link of deepmind playing against the top-level Stratego masters [0]. I usually find Stratego to be a bit of a dull game (less elegant and more drawn out than Go and chess), but I'm a sucker for watching top-level AIs play. Its skills for bluffing are both fascinating and a bit scary. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaUdWoSMjSY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-9ZXmyNKgs h…

Fascinating games. But I played a lot of Stratego as a kid, and I remember 1 was the strongest piece and 9 was the weakest. In these videos it seems 10 is strongest and 2 is weakest and that's making it confusing to watch. Did the pieces change sometime in the past 40 years or am I imagining things?
Post reply on HN