21–30 of 51 posts
We're also discussing support for such projects using game replays from HSReplay.net :)
So perhaps it's worth pointing out, that this paper specifically addresses a sub-problem of Starcraft play, micromanagement ('micro') [1]
The game engine runs at 24 frames per second. (As an aside, 'frames' in this context likely does not map to physical FPS of the display).
>We ran all the following experiments with a skip_frames of 9 (meaning that we take about 2.6 actions per unit per second).
The research team found that attempting to move at a superhuman pace (eg one action every frame), resulted in a subpar performance and hyper-parameterization indicated 2.6 to be an ideal action per second.
In context, this translates to an APM of 156. Or, roughly half that of professional Korean e-athletes. [2]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micromanagement_(gameplay)
Generalized reasoning in strategy games AI is an especially difficult problem for machine learning. IRL, top StarCraft players routinely model their opponents mental states and psychology to create an edge. So perhaps it's worth pointing out, that this paper specifically addresses a sub-problem of Starcraft play, micromanagement ('micro') [1] The game engine runs at 24 frames per second. (As an aside, 'frames' in thi…
Moving at extremely fine-grained timesteps can make learning much more difficult, because now a reward arrives millions of timesteps delayed rather than hundreds or thousands. It's like trying to teach a NN to compose piano music by starting down at the 1ms raw audio level. This is part of why audio synthesis was so difficult up until recently with DeepMind's WaveNet. In theory, being able to move every frame should enable extremely superhuman performance, but in practice, you can't learn your way there. So often people will chunk data to make it easier to learn the higher-level concepts: operate on words, rather than characters, for example.
http://webdocs.cs.ualberta.ca/~cdavid/starcraftaicomp/report...
The two papers in RTS techniques sections are a must read for an idea of what problems it poses along with results of prior attempts. The ability of human pro's to detect AI patterns and defeat them with bluffs is pretty consistent. StarCraft, like Poker, involves lots of psychological analyses and ploys.
Even if Google or Facebook make one, I still think of humans as superior until it can learn how to beat them with mere dozens to hundreds of games rather than what was fed into AlphaGo. That wasn't human equivalent or superior so much as approximating the results of nearly all human activity in the space then focusing it against one human. You could call it superhuman but it required tons of activity by brilliant humans. Brilliant humans require little with the champions a lot less than the automated techniques. Lots of self-discovery with limited data. I want to see the AI's pull that off plus keep it going when encountering humans with innovative, never-before-seen strategies. That's when I'll give them credit as useful on barely-defined problems with curveballs like humans.
It's a misconception that StarCraft is a strategy game. If you look at how it's actually played by human pros, it looks closer to a fighting game; very reflex-driven & heavy on micro-interactions. You would expect an un-gated AI with effectively infinite actions per second to do very well.
Generalized reasoning in strategy games AI is an especially difficult problem for machine learning. IRL, top StarCraft players routinely model their opponents mental states and psychology to create an edge. So perhaps it's worth pointing out, that this paper specifically addresses a sub-problem of Starcraft play, micromanagement ('micro') [1] The game engine runs at 24 frames per second. (As an aside, 'frames' in thi…
After loosing on the Go territory seams like fb is trying to challenge Alphabet on StarCraft. DeepMind already declared they will go for StartCraft as a next challenge does it mean that they accept the challenge? I'm actually happy to see what could be the result! The only weak point for the StarCraft community is that it would be on SC1 and not SC2.
Actually SC1 is the defacto choice when talking about StarCraft esports and the best choice since the best SC players have been honing their skills on SC1 for a long time (see South Korea SC1 esports scene).
Generalized reasoning in strategy games AI is an especially difficult problem for machine learning. IRL, top StarCraft players routinely model their opponents mental states and psychology to create an edge. So perhaps it's worth pointing out, that this paper specifically addresses a sub-problem of Starcraft play, micromanagement ('micro') [1] The game engine runs at 24 frames per second. (As an aside, 'frames' in thi…
APM numbers are actions-per-minute, not the actions-per-unit-per-minute measurement in which the AI's performance is reported. It's not clear how the two map to each other -- the AI may well be exceeding human performance when multiple unit groups are considered.
It would then seem to suggest, that forces with more than say, 5 units (780 average sustained APM) and above, would likely be getting into super human territory.
Generalized reasoning in strategy games AI is an especially difficult problem for machine learning. IRL, top StarCraft players routinely model their opponents mental states and psychology to create an edge. So perhaps it's worth pointing out, that this paper specifically addresses a sub-problem of Starcraft play, micromanagement ('micro') [1] The game engine runs at 24 frames per second. (As an aside, 'frames' in thi…
"The researchers found that attempting to move at a superhuman pace (eg one action every frame), resulted in a subpar performance." Moving at extremely fine-grained timesteps can make learning much more difficult, because now a reward arrives millions of timesteps delayed rather than hundreds or thousands. It's like trying to teach a NN to compose piano music by starting down at the 1ms raw audio level. This is part…
After loosing on the Go territory seams like fb is trying to challenge Alphabet on StarCraft. DeepMind already declared they will go for StartCraft as a next challenge does it mean that they accept the challenge? I'm actually happy to see what could be the result! The only weak point for the StarCraft community is that it would be on SC1 and not SC2.
SC1 is not a weak point, it's generally considered to be better balanced, and is the "gold standard" for RTS's. SC1 also has far more training dataset than SC2.
There isn't something similar available for SC2 due to a mix of technical and nontechnical issues:
https://github.com/bwapi/bwapi/wiki/FAQ#will-there-be-an-api...