111–120 of 242 posts
Comparing against Stockfish 8 in a paper released today and labeling it as "Stockfish" is bordering on being dishonest. The current stockfish version (14) would make AlphaZero look bad, so they don't include it ...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fun fact: The consensus between professional go and chess players is that all new AI systems (alphago, etc) have really revitalised the game and introduced incredible amount of new strategies and depth.
I wish alphago was more "democratized" -- that is to say, I have many questions and experiments I'd love to run on it (a friend of mine and I have frequently pondered Go played in various different topological spaces, and I'd love to see an AI's result, for example).
Yawn, show me a computer that game make fun games
You're getting downvotes but honestly I agree. Who cares about board games? We should've moved on from this once we "solved" chess and Go. There are more important things and it's not remotely surprising that a computer can beat a human when there's a simple, abstract optimization problem to throw computing power at. Make it creative...now that's a challenge worthy of the top AI talent.
Comparing against Stockfish 8 in a paper released today and labeling it as "Stockfish" is bordering on being dishonest. The current stockfish version (14) would make AlphaZero look bad, so they don't include it ...
Isn't the point comparing traditional heuristic techniques against DNN-learned techniques? I understand the latest Stockfish is etching quite close to AlphaZero techniques, but maybe I am wrong.
I want to see deepmind make a bot to play team based first person shooters like csgo and rainbow6 siege, to stack up five of them against a team of professional players.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I started with Consider Phlebas but stopped because it seems too slow for me. Does it get better in the later chapters?
I couldn't get through the cannibal part of Consider Phlebas, was soo weird.
I like 80% of his work, 15% is a pointless depressing slog, and the other 5% is just too much for me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I started with Consider Phlebas but stopped because it seems too slow for me. Does it get better in the later chapters?
It does, but IMO it's probably worth reading The Player of Games or Use of Weapons before it anyway. With the exception of perhaps Surface Detail, none of the Culture books rely on any others. Consider Phlebas gives a good view of The Culture from "outside" (the perspective of the Idrians) but is quite slow.
I know Use of Weapons doesn't depend on any of the other books for its plot, but is it a decent intro to the setting? If it is, that's where I'd recommend starting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I tried my hand once or twice at (re-)implementing board games [0], so that I could run some common "AI" algorithms on the game trees. What tripped me up every time is that most board games have a lot of "if this happens, there is this specific rule that applies". Even relatively simple games (like Homeworlds) are pretty hard to nail down perfectly due to all the special cases. Do you, or somebody else, have any reco…
+1 to boardgame.io. It provides very good abstractions for turns, phases, players, and partial information. I’ve implemented small games with a few hours of effort, and that includes a UI.