Fairly nice article on AI methods for games

Moderator
Posts: 529
Joined: 2003.03
Post: #1

"Yes, well, that's the sort of blinkered, Philistine pig-ignorance I've come to expect from you non-creative garbage."
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 3,577
Joined: 2003.06
Post: #2
Nice article. Here's another site to peruse on ai: ai-junkie He has links to the other major ai sites there as well.
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 529
Joined: 2003.03
Post: #3
I like AI Depot as well.

"Yes, well, that's the sort of blinkered, Philistine pig-ignorance I've come to expect from you non-creative garbage."
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 208
Joined: 2005.04
Post: #4
From the first article:

Quote:In its simplest form, an action AI system can be implemented as a preprogrammed action sequence that is executed repeatedly.

And how is this artificial intelligence?
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 133
Joined: 2008.05
Post: #5
How is it not?
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 749
Joined: 2003.01
Post: #6
why could it be?

©h€ck øut µy stuƒƒ åt ragdollsoft.com
New game in development Rubber Ninjas - Mac Games Downloads
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 522
Joined: 2002.04
Post: #7
There really isn't a definition of Artificial Intelligence, and historically the definition has been a moving target. Once someone figures out how to do something, it ends up no longer considered AI. Think of the term loosely.
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 208
Joined: 2005.04
Post: #8
LongJumper Wrote:How is it not?

There's no input. The program isn't reacting to its "environment". Simply performing a sequence over and over does not count as AI IMO.

For example, I would NOT consider the following program to be AI:

Code:
while (1) {
  print("hello");
  makeABeepSound();
}
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 133
Joined: 2008.05
Post: #9
You're right, in AI terminology there's usually an enviroment that an agent reacts to. However, in reading, there is a context that a sentence belongs to. I highly doubt the author was trying to say that printing hello and making a beep noise is AI. Read the rest of the paragraph, it makes sense. I think what he was trying to say is that the simplest AI is simply a finite state machine, in which you can traverse through it as many times as necessary.
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 529
Joined: 2003.03
Post: #10
LongJumper Wrote:I highly doubt the author was trying to say that printing hello and making a beep noise is AI.

(crumples paper marked 'AI routine' into a ball)
(throws at wastebasket)
(misses)

"Yes, well, that's the sort of blinkered, Philistine pig-ignorance I've come to expect from you non-creative garbage."
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 208
Joined: 2005.04
Post: #11
LongJumper Wrote:You're right, in AI terminology there's usually an enviroment that an agent reacts to. However, in reading, there is a context that a sentence belongs to. I highly doubt the author was trying to say that printing hello and making a beep noise is AI. Read the rest of the paragraph, it makes sense. I think what he was trying to say is that the simplest AI is simply a finite state machine, in which you can traverse through it as many times as necessary.

I did read the whole paragraph (and the entire article). Here's the example finite state machine presented by the author:

[Image: 07fig01.jpg]

IMHO, that's not AI. While I do think it's possible to create artificial intelligence through the development of a finite state machine, a machine which never alters its behavioural pattern cannot be considered intelligent.
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 529
Joined: 2003.03
Post: #12
Yow! Somehow this turned into Philosophy 101!

"Yes, well, that's the sort of blinkered, Philistine pig-ignorance I've come to expect from you non-creative garbage."
Quote this message in a reply
Nibbie
Posts: 1
Joined: 2010.11
Post: #13
Here we go into "what is AI anyway?"

Does anyone object to the following definition:

A program or machine that emulates, or attempts to emulate the decision making (not necessarily intelligent decision making Wink, just like us) of humans.

Anyway, the unfortunate truth is that with our current technology, no machine can be "intelligent" in the way that we are, and in the foreseeable future none can have a sense of self. I'm not going to say this will never happen, but it certainly won't happen in a C program.
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 3,577
Joined: 2003.06
Post: #14
Joseph Duchesne Wrote:Anyway, the unfortunate truth is that with our current technology, no machine can be "intelligent" in the way that we are, and in the foreseeable future none can have a sense of self. I'm not going to say this will never happen, but it certainly won't happen in a C program.
It's easy to say that because it hasn't been done yet. It may very well be true, but I'm not so convinced that's entirely the case. There are clearly software mechanisms that we have developed which can indeed demonstrate at least a minimum of intelligence. I read through AI Techniques for Game Programming by Mat Buckland last year and there is some stuff toward the end of the book that really got my mind cranking on the subject. Using Genetic Algorithms and Artificial Neural Networks you can create agents with some *very* sophisticated behavior with not a whole bunch of code. The line between illusion and intelligence starts to blur when you watch things on a screen start to develop enough intelligence on their own to be able to avoid obstacles much like a bug would. In fact I would say I witnessed behavior that was indistinguishable from a bug. Fascinating!

Alan Turing proposed the test be that you should be able to sit down and have a conversation with a computer and not be able to distinguish between its side of the conversation being made up by a human or a computer. That hasn't happened yet, and judging by what I've read in the transcripts of the yearly winners, no one is really even close yet.

You can't really make one statement that covers all of AI. I think there are about four different categories of AI going on nowadays. Two main fields are Academic and Game. Academic doesn't care about how much processing is involved whereas Game has a processing budget since they have to draw graphics and physics and other stuff, which is usually more important than the AI so it takes a back seat. Within Academic research are two categories referred to as "strong" and "weak" ai research. Strong is a strict emulation of the human brain and weak just does whatever necessary to get the results they need like stock analysis. Within the game field are two areas I refer to as state machine and exotic. State machine would be finite state machines and fuzzy logic. State machines only provide a minimum of illusion of intelligence. They *look* smart, but are really dumb as door nails. Quake bots use FSM's. Most game bots use FSM's of some sort or another. I've encountered some FSM's that made me think there was some Exotic AI used, but found out otherwise. Exotic would be Genetic Algorithms and Artificial Neural Networks. Exotic AI can produce what I believe to be true artificial intelligence, although it depends upon the implementation. Many games use FSM's which have been pre-tuned with Genetic Algorithms, but the GA's are not used in real time.
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 133
Joined: 2008.05
Post: #15
Andrew Wrote:I did read the whole paragraph (and the entire article). Here's the example finite state machine presented by the author:

IMHO, that's not AI. While I do think it's possible to create artificial intelligence through the development of a finite state machine, a machine which never alters its behavioural pattern cannot be considered intelligent.

I don't know where you got that quote from, but it and intelligent shouldn't be in the same sentence... Smile

It is your opinion, but I guess I'm a bit more loose on what I consider artificial intelligence. Just because it's not capable of learning anything else doesn't mean it's not artificial intelligence. My grandpa is old and getting senile, I doubt he could sit down and learn calculus, doesn't mean he's not intelligent. I mean, where in the phrase "Artificial Intelligence" do you see "must be able to learn new things"? I see Artificial, which means made up, not organic, created, and I see intelligence, which means(to me), a thought process, a decision based on what you know about something.

So, that FSM is definetly made up, not organic, created... and it definetly has a thought process, a decision based on what is given to it. It may be very simple, it may not take into account that things change over time, but it's still artificial intelligence. It's not the most intelligent thing ever, but it still is intelligent. If the "AI" was simply: walk forward, then I wouldn't consider it AI, becase it's not making a decision. This one is making a decision, based on what the developer thought was important information, disregarding a lot of other things for simplicity, speed, and pointlessness. It's kind of like pruning, the developer decided, "Well, I suppose it could learn more, but if anything else it learns is just redundant, I can cover everything in one small FSM that captures the general idea, and displays a hint of intelligence to the player... well then, I've created an artificial intelligent being."
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  [Article] Advanced Racing AI SethWillits 2 4,139 Mar 25, 2009 05:09 AM
Last Post: Ingemar
  Some nice tutorials on graphics and physics Leisure Suit Lurie 1 2,247 Jul 22, 2005 07:57 AM
Last Post: Nick