Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Computer Learns Language By Playing Games

Soulskill posted more than 3 years ago | from the did-you-just-teach-computers-how-to-conquer-the-world dept.

AI 133

Frans Faase writes "By basing its strategies on the text of a manual, a computer infers the meanings of words without human supervision. The paper Learning to Win by Reading Manuals in a Monte-Carlo Framework (PDF) explains how a computer program succeeds in playing Civilization II using the official game manual as a strategy guide. This manual uses a large vocabulary of 3638 words, and is composed of 2083 sentences, each on average 16.9 words long. By this the program improves it success rate from 45% to 78% in playing the game. No prior knowledge of the language is used."

cancel ×

133 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Better at manuals than my wife... (-1, Flamebait)

digitalsolo (1175321) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751154)

So they've managed to create software that can process a manual, with a language it does not already understand, more effectively than my wife.

Impressive. Now they need to make it reiterate the manual in a way that she can understand.

Re:Better at manuals than my wife... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36751254)

And yet you were dumb enough to marry her?

Re:Better at manuals than my wife... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36751326)

You don't have to be dumb to marry a realdoll.

Re:Better at manuals than my wife... (1)

Xacid (560407) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751476)

You've obviously never experienced life with a female.

Re:Better at manuals than my wife... (2)

digitalsolo (1175321) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751978)

Tuning pages with your right hand does not count as understanding them, any more than your hand counts as a spouse.

Re:Better at manuals than my wife... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36752260)

And you are too dumb to realize tits don't have an IQ. Nor do they need one.

Call DHS (2)

AndyAndyAndyAndy (967043) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751222)

All Civilization-franchise manuals soon to be confiscated and destroyed in the name of national security.

Re:Call DHS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36753960)

HAL says it is alright Dave.

A strategy to use... (2)

TDyl (862130) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751248)

in schools? Get kids reading decent manuals (text-books) and perhaps they may actually learn something and find they can do decent things with the new-found knowledge.

Re:A strategy to use... (5, Funny)

vlm (69642) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751738)

in schools? Get kids reading decent manuals (text-books) and perhaps they may actually learn something and find they can do decent things with the new-found knowledge.

This probably dates myself quite accurately, but pretty much, Infocom taught me how to read and type.

It has its side effects, saying "inv" when I look in my wallet, saying "save" before I do something dangerous, but overall it worked pretty well.

A good geek story... (1)

Kamiza Ikioi (893310) | more than 3 years ago | (#36752930)

I was once slicing potatoes. I always done this by hand, but I had one of those new plastic cutting boards with the blade built in that I wanted to try. I loved the speed, but I didn't know just how fast it cut. I would do half a potato, then switch to holding down the potato with a hand held plunger thingy. The plunger was really hard to hold, so I'd go longer and longer without it. By the 5th potato (the last), I went so fast and so far that the pain of slicing a millimeter off the tip of my thumb was an instant and panic filled moment.

Immediately my mind raced...

Undo! Undo! Undo!

The doctor that used something like a needle tipped hot gun to cauterize my thumb got a kick out of the story. I've never used one of those demon machines since.

Re:A good geek story... (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 3 years ago | (#36753198)

You should have sued the maker for not including a warning:
Warning! This device does not have an undo function!
SCNR :-)

Re:A strategy to use... (1)

Dyinobal (1427207) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751750)

I learned to read playing the Original Dragon Warrior on NES. I've always felt games in general get a bad rap when it comes to their educational value. Even games that obviously educational often have some value to them. Granted some more than others. A text heavy rpg can really improve someones vocabulary as well as improving their reading. Where as a first person shooter may not have much in the way for obvious education.

Re:A strategy to use... (4, Funny)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751870)

Indeed, I make daily use of the differences between a partisan, ranseur, glaive, guisarme, glaive-guisarm, guisarm-glaive, lucern hammer, military fork, volge, etc.

Re:A strategy to use... (1)

TDyl (862130) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751968)

Too true, as do I, but as a member of a medieval recreation society I guess I need to.

Re:A strategy to use... (1)

mhajicek (1582795) | more than 3 years ago | (#36753034)

They all represent as a six foot stick of rattan, so what's the difference?

Re:A strategy to use... (1)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 3 years ago | (#36752426)

Well, it means you get an entirely different meaning from the phrase "partisan hack"

Re:A strategy to use... (1)

Verteiron (224042) | more than 3 years ago | (#36752854)

Actually if the GP learned to read on the original Dragon Warrior, then he probably learned the difference between a PARTSN, RANSR, GUISA, GLAIVE, LHAMMR, and MFORK.

Re:A strategy to use... (1)

Daetrin (576516) | more than 3 years ago | (#36753376)

Indeed, I make daily use of the differences between a partisan, ranseur, glaive, guisarme, glaive-guisarm, guisarm-glaive, lucern hammer, military fork, volge, etc.

SRSLY? Where do you shop? I've been having some issues at my local store. [giantitp.com]

Re:A strategy to use... (2)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 3 years ago | (#36752158)

I learned to read playing the Original Dragon Warrior on NES.

Wow, as someone old enough to have had to learn to read with books ... just wow.

I can't imagine having learned to read on a video game ... we had Dr. Seuss and "Little Golden Books" and the like.

Rocks and snow, uphill, both ways ... we had it tough I tell you. ;-)

Re:A strategy to use... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36752306)

Rocks and snow, uphill, both ways ... we had it tough I tell you. ;-)

That's what we get for letting Escher on the city planning committee...

Re:A strategy to use... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36752884)

Aye, my teachers always wondered how I knew shit from history and book references and whatnot... It was all do to me wasting my life away with c64 and nintendo games.

Re:A strategy to use... (2)

I Read Good (2348294) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751988)

My first thought was to use this as a way to gauge the effectiveness of educational texts.

Re:A strategy to use... (2)

TDyl (862130) | more than 3 years ago | (#36752016)

That is a much better way of saying what I wanted to.

Identifying people (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36751268)

I wonder how good that algorithm is at identifying people using their style, grammar and errorrs. Think Facebook and Google+.

Re:Identifying people (1)

DanTheStone (1212500) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751510)

their style, grammar and errorrs.

Intentional? I would guess that's a rare one; maybe this AC could be found as he describes.

Prior knowledge of the language is used (1, Troll)

jojoba_oil (1071932) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751276)

If no prior knowledge of the language is used, how is the program able to determine word boundaries? Perhaps they meant the domain-specific language (meaning vocabulary), for example "unit" and "cell"? Otherwise, there's a plethora of bits of knowledge about English grammar and structure that they probably coded into the AI...

I also find it junk that the web.mit.edu link posts a screenshot of Civ 5, when the AI they are discussing runs against Civ 2... My bullshit meter is starting to tickle.

Re:Prior knowledge of the language is used (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36751342)

Right, so because the journalist of the article picked the wrong screenshot, and because they likely told their software that whitespace seperates words, it must be bullshit.

Standard slashdot loser, trying so desperately to degrade the efforts of others to make himself feel better about his dead-end IT job.

Re:Prior knowledge of the language is used (2)

jojoba_oil (1071932) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751596)

Right, so because the journalist of the article picked the wrong screenshot, and because they likely told their software that whitespace seperates words, it must be bullshit.

Standard slashdot loser, trying so desperately to degrade the efforts of others to make himself feel better about his dead-end IT job.

Taken from the article itself:

But what would it mean for a computer to actually understand the meaning of a sentence written in ordinary English — or French, or Urdu, or Mandarin

So if they're coding that "whitespace separates words", then any text written in Mandarin will consist of sentences with one single word? Mandarin and many other Asian languages (other Chinese dialects, Korean, Japanese, Thai) do not use whitespace to indicate word boundary.

I won't find language AI interesting until we have true language learning. Sure, this may be better than previous attempts at language AI, but when there are limiting assumptions built into the foundation of the code, I find it hard to believe that it will ever be able to "learn" any language.

Re:Prior knowledge of the language is used (1)

blackraven14250 (902843) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751674)

They do use separations, but in their own way. Each character is a self-contained unit, separated from the others by being a different character. Each character is comprised of 5 or so different sections, each with its own function.

Re:Prior knowledge of the language is used (2)

jojoba_oil (1071932) | more than 3 years ago | (#36752304)

They do use separations, but in their own way. Each character is a self-contained unit, separated from the others by being a different character. Each character is comprised of 5 or so different sections, each with its own function.

You're partially right.

In Mandarin, each character is a self-contained unit, and is separate from others around it. The problem, though, is that one character is not always a complete word. If you look character-by-character, you'll break down multi-character words like "shou ji" (cellphone) to "hand" and "machine".

Further, there isn't one single way of constructing a character in Chinese; there are 6 ways. The only consistency is that in some ways, there are radicals that can be used to glean the general meaning (eg, san dian shui "three-dot-water" or shou zi pang "hand-character radical").

I'm not as familiar with other Asian languages, but my understanding is that one Korean character is constructed from an alphabet and only indicates one syllable -- again, not always a complete word.

Re:Prior knowledge of the language is used (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36751920)

I won't find language AI interesting until we have true scottsman learning.

FTFY

Re:Prior knowledge of the language is used (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751384)

I also find it junk that the web.mit.edu link posts a screenshot of Civ 5, when the AI they are discussing runs against Civ 2... My bullshit meter is starting to tickle.

Even worse if you read the paper, they ran it on freeciv. I'm sure the screenshots would show Civ5 on Vista, of course.

Re:Prior knowledge of the language is used (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 3 years ago | (#36753270)

They first tried to run it on Civ 5, but the program started by reading the license, and then refused to continue. :-)

I hope they don't set it loose on WOW (1)

SengirV (203400) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751314)

Every other word out of it's "mouth" would be 'anal'

Re:I hope they don't set it loose on WOW (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36751584)

So the computer learns a new word, 'retentive'. As in, it's being anal retentive with its vocabulary.

"Anal is such an anal anal"

Re:I hope they don't set it loose on WOW (1)

Mr. Shotgun (832121) | more than 3 years ago | (#36753290)

Interesting game. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36751328)

The only winning move is not to play.

How about a nice game of chess?

A proper job for computers (4, Funny)

jfengel (409917) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751344)

Computers have always been good for doing tedious jobs that people don't want to do.

Like reading manuals.

Re:A proper job for computers (0)

vlm (69642) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751412)

Computers have always been good for doing tedious jobs that people don't want to do.

Like playing Civ. Ow the burn. Just kidding, I really like Civ. The recent versions have too much touchy feely timefilling with animations and readers, but they're still tolerable. Still not sure what to think about the recent square to hex conversion.

Re:A proper job for computers (1)

tmosley (996283) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751936)

Hex is a major improvement in my opinion. I don't know about only having one unit per "square", though I do like that that makes tactical. But sometimes I would rather just let the computer handle that, or design a unit formation and have that whole unit take u a square, with a limit to the number of soldiers/artillery/whatever that could fit in the area. That way you could set up spearmen guarding archers with calvary on the flanks for ancient warfare in open fields, or a core tank unit with infantry in a picket line on either flank for city invasions in late industrial era war.

Re:A proper job for computers (1)

jojoba_oil (1071932) | more than 3 years ago | (#36753110)

I like the simplicity of not having to worry about formations in Civ.

If you want formations and really in-depth strategy for battles, check out the Total War franchise of games. My little brother played Rome: TW endlessly, and my understanding is that Rome:TW is the best one in the franchise.

Re:A proper job for computers (1)

Plainswind (2089218) | more than 3 years ago | (#36753204)

Shogun 2: TW is the best one... on hard difficulty, that game is actually HARD.

Re:A proper job for computers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36751436)

Computers have always been good for doing tedious jobs that people don't want to do.

Like playing Civ 2.

FTFY

Re:A proper job for computers (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36752898)

Computers have always been good for doing tedious jobs that people don't want to do.

Like reading manuals.

Or playing Civilization II.

delta between manual and no manual (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751364)

Before "gaming" became synonymous with exclusively FPS "if you can see it, shoot it", there used to be all kinds of games available, often with interesting manuals.

Needless to say, the downloaded copies were better than store bought, because they didn't have copy protection / DRM, but obviously they didn't have the manual that came in the box from the store.

Section 6 of the paper seems to imply that even the most illiterate fool would still win about 30% more games by having a copy of the manual, no matter how illiterate they are. Even if the manual was written by the programmers in Hindi, even non-Hindi readers, at least as smart as a computer, would win 30% more games...

If only the games industry made non-FPS games, then they could use this to motivate people to buy the game with the manual, instead of just downloading... You'd still have to download the game anyway to avoid the DRM, but at least you'd win a minimum of 30% more games by having the manual.

Re:delta between manual and no manual (1)

McGiraf (196030) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751528)

pdf

Re:delta between manual and no manual (1)

Haedrian (1676506) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751690)

Its not nearly the same thing is it?

I used to like reading the manual while waiting for the 'loading' screen to disappear.

Re:delta between manual and no manual (2)

nedlohs (1335013) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751562)

If only the games industry made non-FPS game

And yet somehow I've managed to buy dozens of games that are non-FPS in the last few years. Must have been made by aliens I guess.

Re:delta between manual and no manual (3, Funny)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751708)

Section 6 of the paper seems to imply that even the most illiterate fool would still win about 30% more games by having a copy of the manual, no matter how illiterate they are.

I just like to look at the pictures.

Re:delta between manual and no manual (1)

brit74 (831798) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751882)

If only the games industry made non-FPS games, then they could use this to motivate people to buy the game with the manual, instead of just downloading...
In general, games are designed to function without a manual. Why? Because a lot of people don't bother reading the manual - so game developers get better sales with an easy-to-learn game that requires no manual reading. I can't remember the last time I read a game manual. I think it might've been Civ 3, because I need to find out more detail about how something worked. Does World of Goo, Angry Birds, Starcraft 2, or Braid need a manual? I played all of them without a manual.

Re:delta between manual and no manual (1)

Raenex (947668) | more than 3 years ago | (#36752522)

In general, games are designed to function without a manual. Why? Because a lot of people don't bother reading the manual - so game developers get better sales with an easy-to-learn game that requires no manual reading.

Just to add to this, what changed was that developers got a clue and made learning how to play part of the game. It's pretty much standard for games now that the opening levels are a tutorial.

It wasn't that people just didn't read the manuals, it's that even if they did, it's much more fun to be taught in-game.

Re:delta between manual and no manual (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 3 years ago | (#36753332)

i bought and read the new issue of edge lately. game developers are proud their games can be played by retards without hitting a wall.

Re:delta between manual and no manual (2)

Chris Pimlott (16212) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751956)

Needless to say, the downloaded copies were better than store bought, because they didn't have copy protection / DRM, but obviously they didn't have the manual that came in the box from the store.

You'd think it might have been easier to have the computer use the same technique we used to do in that situation - try every key one by one until you figured out how the game worked.

Re:delta between manual and no manual (1)

gman003 (1693318) | more than 3 years ago | (#36752116)

If only the games industry made non-FPS games

That's odd, I've played dozens of non-FPS games. Arkham Asylum. Mass Effect. Portal. Dragon Age. Final Fantasy. Assassin's Creed. Sure, the FPS is popular, but no more so than the platformer was in the early 90s.

Further, more and more games are blurring genres. Mass Effect is combining the RPG and the third-person shooter, Borderlands is almost a dungeon-crawler at times, and pretty much every game has some sort of RPG mechanic. People are making hybrids of genres normally left alone - platformer-shooters, puzzle-RPGs, MMO-Sports.

And even within "pure" shooters, you've got an incredible variety of gameplay. You've got your ultra-realistic shooters (STALKER), your action-movie shooters (Battlefield, Call of Duty, Crysis, Halo), your old-school arcadey shooters (Serious Sam, Bulletstorm), your team-based online shooters (Brink, TF2), and a bunch more I can't neatly categorize (FEAR, Left 4 Dead, Rage (soon)). It's a lot more diverse a genre than it was two decades ago, back when we were still calling them "Doom clones", when everything looked and felt the same.

The shooters haven't killed off the other genres. They've just blended everything together so much that you can no longer say "that game is a shooter" without needing to qualify that by adding "with some light RPG elements", or "with a number of vehicle-racing segments", or "with heavy strategy elements".

Re:delta between manual and no manual (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 3 years ago | (#36753440)

you seem to confuse tunnel runs with rpg's, rpg's with animations, animations with ultra realistic, and ultra realistic with just plain unfinished.

tho, fear2 is just blood 2 with added press-ctrl-quickly fuckings to player(and half a game from philips cdi).

My kids learned language playing games too. (2)

idontgno (624372) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751374)

Mostly the kind of language you don't use among polite company.

Call me when computers learn to swear idiomatically and emotionally appropriately.

Re:My kids learned language playing games too. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36752106)

Well, double dumb ass on you!

Re:My kids learned language playing games too. (4, Funny)

Bob the Super Hamste (1152367) | more than 3 years ago | (#36752220)

As far a children learning to swear I learned from my dad. One of my first complete and correct sentences was "Oh fuck this!". I was about one and a half years old and trying to put together a roof rake (it was the summer) and there was a screw and wing nut to hold it together and I just couldn't get it together. So after a little bit I got frustrated and with a piece of the rake in each hand held it up in the air proclaimed "Oh fuck this!", threw it to the ground, and stomped off.

Re:My kids learned language playing games too. (2)

idontgno (624372) | more than 3 years ago | (#36753318)

It's amazing, isn't it?

When my son was 2 years hold, I discovered he had learned my tendency to mutter "Well, shit.." when encountering a frustrating delay in some process I'm doing (canonical example: I've bought the wrong fasteners for putting something together).

He's playing with his Duplos, and he discovers he can't find the piece he needs to bridge two little pillars he's assembled... and he mutters "Well, shit" while shaking his head.

I couldn't decide to be mortified or fall down laughing.

Re:My kids learned language playing games too. (1)

Inda (580031) | more than 3 years ago | (#36753874)

And I still remember the looks I got when I said "Oh sugar bags!" as an infant.

It was something my mother said too much.

Everyone knew the secret - my mother was obviously saying "shit bags" - and I was confused.

Baseline win rate (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36751398)

The baseline rate of winning was 46%. What level of strategy was being implemented at this baseline? It seems like there's a lot of room for interpretation. If I wanted exciting results (and had no actual interest in doing science), I'd probably do a combinatorial removing and adding of various algorithms from my baseline until "reading" the manual gave the highest jump in the win rate.

Civ2 AI (1)

robbrit (1408421) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751402)

Nice, now I have an AI to play against that isn't completely retarded.

The next step is to get this sort of thing onto Battle.net.

Re:Civ2 AI (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751482)

Nice, now I have an AI to play against that isn't completely retarded.

Read the paper. The "reading AI" developed at MIT was still crushed by the game-provided AI about half the time. Gives you an idea just how badly the game-provided AI plays.

Re:Civ2 AI (1)

RJHelms (1554807) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751726)

Nice, now I have an AI to play against that isn't completely retarded.

Read the paper. The "reading AI" developed at MIT was still crushed by the game-provided AI about half the time. Gives you an idea just how badly the game-provided AI plays.

Read the paper. That was before they had the "reading AI" read anything. After it read the manual, their AI beat the game-provided AI 78% of the time.

FreeCiv AI (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36751760)

Heh, it got crushed by the FREECIV AI, which is worse than the Civ 2 AI. Makes me feel better about the superiority of man.

Let's play FreeCiv then claim it's Civilization 2 (0)

Dwedit (232252) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751426)

If you read the paper, you see that they are using FreeCiv, and not Civilization II.

Re:Let's play FreeCiv then claim it's Civilization (1)

nedlohs (1335013) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751762)

Which makes it even better. Having the computer "read" the manual of one game makes it better at playing a different game.

Well that is on page 7 (1)

roguegramma (982660) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751828)

And on page 1 the paper speaks about Civilization II.

Can't blame the editors this time, at least not much.

its rate of victory jumped from 46 to 79 percent (1)

taiwanjohn (103839) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751470)

Also from TFA: initially, its behavior is almost totally random.

I have no idea what constitutes a "win" in this game, but if a "totally random" strategy can win 46% of the time it sounds a little cheesy. Sorta like life, I guess.

Re:its rate of victory jumped from 46 to 79 percen (1)

Ezubaric (464724) | more than 3 years ago | (#36752432)

The types of games they played is very constrained. It's only two civs on a very small map, and the only way the algorithm learns to win is a settler rush. It's not deep strategy.

Re:its rate of victory jumped from 46 to 79 percen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36752556)

For the purposes of this project, it appears that a "win" is annihilation of the opponent's civilization.

The totally random strategy never won a game. The trial-and-error based AI that started out untrained and making random decisions was almost able to match the built-in AI, after learning all it could. Upon being fed the manual, it improved significantly.

Re:its rate of victory jumped from 46 to 79 percen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36753786)

The 46% win is after the AI implementation learns (somewhat) how to play the game. It isn't winning 46% of the time by always doing random actions.

The "totally random" is in reference to the fact that it starts random, and then learns to do the "right" (//less wrong) action based on the in-game feedback from its random action.

This is in contrast to the method the researchers were testing, which uses both in-game feedback, plus the manual's text, to refine its actions.

Language from games? You mean as in... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36751484)

Greetings Professor Falken. Would. you. like. a nice. game. of. chess?

I'm impressed (1)

makubesu (1910402) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751570)

I played Civilization 2 for years, and I still don't understand the rules.

Re:I'm impressed (1)

rbrausse (1319883) | more than 3 years ago | (#36752172)

you should have RTFM :P

Re:I'm impressed (2)

Bob the Super Hamste (1152367) | more than 3 years ago | (#36752252)

I believe that one of them is your battleships always loses to warriors or pike men.

But not programmed to feel emotion... (1)

madhatter256 (443326) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751618)

How does it know it wins??

I think emotion would yield better results because bad emotions, such as losing tend to make people try harder and not lose rather than try sequentially try different strategies.

I would make them think further than just choosing different pathways in the game, as well as learn from their mistakes.

Re:But not programmed to feel emotion... (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751782)

How does it know it wins??

I think emotion would yield better results because bad emotions, such as losing tend to make people try harder and not lose rather than try sequentially try different strategies.

I would make them think further than just choosing different pathways in the game, as well as learn from their mistakes.

Page 3 algorithm 1, kind of neural network like learning feedback. Probably gets stuck in local maxima, should do simulated annealing.

uh oh (2)

paiute (550198) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751714)

If this thing gets a copy of the Bible, we are boned.

Re:uh oh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36752484)

Don't worry, Revelations is designed to kill off all known intelligences, artificial or otherwise.

Let it play an MMO (1)

fishbowl (7759) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751754)

It could learn that "bad" is a noun and "fail" is an adjective.

Roguelikes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36751756)

I'd be curious to see how it fares in a roguelike game. That would be for me the ultimate test in learning to play by merely reading the manual.

Xbox Live (1)

DarthVain (724186) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751794)

I learned a whole new language playing Halo 2 on Xbox live.

Re:Xbox Live (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36752346)

You're obviously 14yrs old.

Backward title? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36751836)

Shouldn't this be "computer learns game by reading manual"? The computer didn't learn to speak, it just learned to play the game...

Unusual example (1)

AdamWill (604569) | more than 3 years ago | (#36751842)

I guess they picked a Civ manual for a reason. I don't remember the Civ II manual, but I remember the original Civ manual - that thing was a brick, a few hundred pages, with an appendix which had most of the algorithms used in the game documented. Not surprised a bot could get better at playing the game with that kind of reference material!

I wish someone was still publishing manuals like that.

Re:Unusual example (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36752706)

That thing was great. The back cover was a foldout of the tech tree, and the book itself was full of interesting historical details about the game concepts.

Shall we play a game? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36752076)

How about a Nice game of Civ2?

Programming Language Manual (1)

mswhippingboy (754599) | more than 3 years ago | (#36752210)

It would be interesting to feed this thing a "Java for Dummies" or "Learn C# in 21 Days" book and see if it can start writing it's own software. Maybe even throw in some books on AI and see if it can generate it's own AI software and become self aware.

Re:Programming Language Manual (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36752478)

It would be interesting to feed this thing a "Java for Dummies" or "Learn C# in 21 Days" book and see if it can start writing it's own software. Maybe even throw in some books on AI and see if it can generate it's own AI software and become self aware.

awwwww crap.

Re:Programming Language Manual (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 3 years ago | (#36753380)

But please don't let it read anything about Skynet!

Hello Professor Falken... (0)

monktus (742861) | more than 3 years ago | (#36752256)

How about a nice game of chess?

no let's play Global Thermo Nuclear War (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | more than 3 years ago | (#36752680)

what side do you want

1. USA
2. EU
3. UK
4. Russia
5. Chain
6. north korea
7. iran
8. middle east

Re:no let's play Global Thermo Nuclear War (1)

azgard (461476) | more than 3 years ago | (#36752900)

You joke, but "Poker and Armageddon: The Role of Bluffing in a Nuclear Standoff" was a great paper.

Stop them. (1)

SYSS Mouse (694626) | more than 3 years ago | (#36752586)

Before the AI takes over the world.

Hello, Joshua (2)

Eponymous Hero (2090636) | more than 3 years ago | (#36752640)

Shall we play a game?

How about Global Thermonuclear War?

Wow ... (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 3 years ago | (#36752904)

I can't believe that it had a manual that had enough information to actually boost your score. Documentation nowadays is usually pretty lame, and doesn't actually provide anything instructive.

Kudos to the writers of the Civilization II documentation ... I bet if you tried it with a modern game manual, the computer's score would go down. ;-)

This tells me they actually wrote a comprehensive guide, which was well written.

Next step (1)

Bemopolis (698691) | more than 3 years ago | (#36752912)

Have it play against me on the XBox. So it can learn profanity.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?