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

Player of Games

arxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 242 posts

Re: Player of Games

#151

Post by piyh »

henshao wrote: post #138
fho wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually played Splendor for the first (three) time(s) some time ago and honestly didn't really like it. It's a very simple game, true. I feel like there are not many decision points for me as a player and therefore there is not much strategy involved. But maybe that is just my view after very few games. (At the same time that probably makes it a good choice for a game implementation) Thing is that for all my examp…

I think splendor gets more interesting if your opponents are also trying to be strategic. You can see what color chips they are picking up, which lets you know what they are aiming for, which influences what card you want to aim for or reserve. Mid game, you can see what colors other people are missing and try to corner colors to give you room to breath and pick up cards. You can also see the set of colors people are…

It's like if you turned tuning magic mana bases into a stand alone game.

Re: Player of Games

#152

Post by arlort »

hoseja wrote: post #20
pharmakom wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No he is not, but AIs are not allowed in the competition the story centers around.

Near the end of the competition, as he is deep in his analysis, the light craft AI gives up on helping him since it gets overwhelmed. Granted it's not a full Culture Mind (kinda hazy, been a while) but still a point for the meatbag.

I always interpreted the end reveal as showing that control was highly confident of both the outcome of the game and of how Gurgeh got to that outcome.

It's been a while but I am pretty sure that the ship lied when saying that it got overwhelmed and did so only because it was confident he was on the right path but needed to get there in a specific way which wouldn't have worked quite the same if the ship intervened

Re: Player of Games

#153

Post by arlort »

fho wrote: post #74
BeenChilling wrote: post #63

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.

Honestly that probably won't be too interesting as (a) one AI could perfectly control several agents (ie perfect coordination of global strategies) and (b) an AI has low to no reaction times and perfect aim (aimbots already have that) so I would expect that would quickly result in a slaughterfest.

What would be interesting would be 5 independent AIs (even just different instances of the same AI of course) using the same interface as human players, so the same controls and the same video output

I am pretty sure aimbots access the internals of the game rather than reading the video output to identify the silhouette of the enemy.

Re: Player of Games

#154

Post by Javantea_ »

fxtentacle wrote: post #54
sillysaurusx wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You often don't need anywhere near the amount of compute in these papers to get similar performance. Suppose you're a business that needs to play games. Most people seem to think that it's a matter of plugging in the settings from the paper, buying the same hardware, then clicking a button and waiting. It's not. The specific settings matter a lot. But my main point is that you'll get most of your performance pretty r…

My personal experience was the opposite. I'm currently trying different approaches for building a Bomberman AI for the Bomberland competition that was discussed here on HN a few weeks ago. "IMPALA with 1 learner takes only around 10 hours to reach the same performance that A3C approaches after 7.5 days." says the paper, but I can run A3C on a cheap CPU-only server but to get that IMPALA timing, I need to spend a lot…

I don't have a lot of experience with IMPALA, but the sequence of events you describe should be very easy for an end-to-end system. Assuming you don't have an end to end system, just getting a gradient would result in rapid learning of that sequence. I'm surprised that at 2.5e9 frames you're not done. Perhaps there is a hyperparameter issue. Sorry I can't help but it sounds like you are in the same place I am with ML project. Good luck.

Re: Player of Games

#155

Post by baq »

arvinsim wrote: post #93
stavros wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I second this, it was excellent. I've only read a few Banks books, but this was my favorite.

I started with Consider Phlebas but stopped because it seems too slow for me. Does it get better in the later chapters?

Consider Phlebas is easily the worst of the series. My top 3 in no particular order are Use of Weapons, Player of Games and Excession.

Re: Player of Games

#156

Post by speed_spread »

smiley1437 wrote: post #96
arvinsim wrote: post #93

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?

If you find Consider Phlebas too slow, try Excession before giving up on Banks.

Eeh, Excession is very good but a still bit hermetic for an introduction to the Culture. It's the only other book I wouldn't recommend as a first along with Consider Phlebas.

Re: Player of Games

#157

Post by 323 »

WilliamDampier wrote: post #60

so this is what Grimes latest song is about?

> All the lyrical evidence that Grimes’ new song ‘Player of Games’ is about ex Elon Musk

> Grimes seemingly makes multiple, thinly veiled references to Musk in the song

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/...

Re: Player of Games

#158

Post by JoeDaDude »

captn3m0 wrote: post #7

If you are interested in this, I maintain a list of boardgame-solving related research at https://github.com/captn3m0/boardgame-research , with sections for specific games. This looks really interesting. It would be a good project to test this against a general card-playing framework to easily test it on a variety of imperfect-information games based on playing cards.

Thank you for posting! Maybe you can include the game of Arimaa [1]. Arimaa was designed to be hard(er) for computers and level the playing field for humans. Algorithms were developed eventually, though I have not kept up to know where that stands today.

[1]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arimaa

Re: Player of Games

#159

Post by seoaeu »

scrozart wrote: post #122
nixed wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the same goes for slumbot in poker, its super old like 2013, the game is played completely different now and current bots would destroy it.

As a commenter above noted, this work is about generality, being able to play every game, and not being the best at every game.

The abstract claims they beat the "strongest openly available agent in heads-up no-limit Texas hold'em poker". To a non-expert that certainly sounds like they're claiming to be the best

Re: Player of Games

#160

Post by bduerst »

chrisweekly wrote: post #132
sdenton4 wrote: post #3

This is clearly part of DeepMind's long-game plan to achieve world domination through board game mastery. Naming the new algorithm after the book is a real tip of their hand... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Player_of_Games

PSA: The "Culture" novels by Iain M Banks are fantastic and can be read in any order. "Player of Games" was the 1st one I read and still probably my favorite.

Player of Games is the second book, and the one I recommend people start The Culture series with.

The first book Consider Phlebas isn't bad, but it isn't as well developed as the rest of the series IMO.

Post reply on HN