Poker Program Battles Humans In Vegas

Bridger writes "Poker software called Polaris will play a rematch against human players during the 2008 World Series of Poker in Las Vegas. Developed by an artificial intelligence group at the University of Alberta in Canada, Polaris will be pitted against several professionals at the Rio Hotel between July 3rd and 6th. 'It's possible, given enough computing power, for computers to play "perfectly," where over a long enough match, the program cannot lose money,"' said associate professor Michael Bowling.'"

Comments

Tell

[illumastorm]

When it's bluffing, it blinks twice.

Lets mess with it

[TornCityVenz]

I'd love to see one of the guys slick at handleing cards, slip a couple extra aces into the deck, or the like. Would the program adapt? Draw a laser and call him a no good sack of mostly water?

They have to turn the monitor on it's side

[StaticEngine]

If they want to correctly display the advanced AI "poker face": :|

Re:They have to turn the monitor on it's side

[somersault]

8|

He's doing the eyes again! May as well fold.

Zero sum game

[Hatta]

Poker is a zero sum game. Pit two of these 'perfect' players against each other, and one of them will lose money.

Re:Zero sum game

[pbhj]

Almost exactly what I was thinking, but for me it was "put 3 of these computers against each other and they'll devalue the currency?".

Re:Zero sum game

[jandrese]

I think the point is that two of them facing off would end up with just as much money as they started with over the long run.

Of course if the pool of money is not unlimited, then in the short term one will pull ahead of the other, and can "win" through sheer random chance. This isn't really that hard of a concept, the idea is that if another player is playing slightly suboptimally, then against this computer and both with a limitless pool of money and playing forever, the computer will slowly but surely pull ahead of the flawed opponent. It does not mean the computer will win against the human players in Vegas for several reasons:

1. The pool of money is limited (and fairly small)
2. The playtime is finite and also fairly small
3. Human players can walk away from the table if they get a short term advantage (quit while you are ahead), I'm guessing the computer program doesn't do that

This reminds me of an old mathematician joke:

One day this guy is finally fed up with his middle-class existence and decides to do something about it. He calls up his best friend, who is a mathematical genius. "Look," he says, "do you suppose you could find some way mathematically of guaranteeing winning at the race track? We could make a lot of money and retire and enjoy life." The mathematician thinks this over a bit and walks away mumbling to himself.

A week later his friend drops by to ask the genius if he's had any success. The genius, looking a little bleary-eyed, replies, "Well, yes, actually I do have an idea, and I'm reasonably sure that it will work, but there a number of details to be figured out.

After the second week the mathematician appears at his friend's house, looking quite a bit rumpled, and announces, "I think I've got it! I still have some of the theory to work out, but now I'm certain that I'm on the right track."

At the end of the third week the mathematician wakes his friend by pounding on his door at three in the morning. He has dark circles under his eyes. His hair hasn't been combed for many days. He appears to be wearing the same clothes as the last time. He has several pencils sticking out from behind his ears and an almost maniacal expression on his face. "WE CAN DO IT! WE CAN DO IT!!" he shrieks. "I have discovered the perfect solution!! And it's so EASY! First, we assume that horses are perfect spheres in simple harmonic motion..."

Re:So What! it's Chess all over again!

[ragethehotey]

Because Chess is a game of complete information, and is largely a matter of brute forcing out the best move from tons of choices. Poker is a game of incomplete information (You do not know your opponents hand), as the decisions your opponent will make influence what the "correct" decision for you to make is. Chess was a matter of computing power, whereas poker is a matter of implementing game theory abilities in the AI.

Link to the competition page

[tansey]

http://poker.cs.ualberta.ca/man-machine/

First match was a draw.

Re:I'm at least as good as this software...

[brady8]

I was hoping this wouldn't have to be said, but playing Poker isn't gambling if you play it properly. The house takes a small cut from each hand which reduces your winnings by a proportionally small amount, but otherwise it's like anything else requiring skill - over time, the best player will always win more money, and the worst player (skill-wise) will lose the most money.

Re:Reminds me of those...

[alrudd1287]

Playing perfectly = keeping 100% of your money in your wallet

Re:Can't lose money?

[Karganeth]

Poker sites are not full of bots. The one I play at is full of terrible players who enjoy throwing their money away.

No bot plays perfect poker. I'm sure that no bot will be perfect for a very, very long time (way beyond my lifetime). The mathematics behind poker is incredibly complex. A good book about it is the mathematics of poker by Bill Chen and Jerrod Ankenman. From reading your post it seems to me that you have a very little idea about the problems with solving poker and even how to play poker. You can't just call when you have the odds and fold when you don't. It just doesn't work that way - that strategy is easily exploited. I'm also not sure why you were modded +5 Insightful... I guess there aren't many poker players here at /.

First hand...

[Hossicle]

If I was playing a computer on the first hand I would go ALL in (and do it blind). ...program would hopefully calculate my SIZE_OF_BALLS() variable as an out of bounds condition and give up. If that didn't work at least I'd be done and could go back to drinkin' in the casino bar.