Ask Slashdot: Best Way To Learn About Game Theory and AI?

Russell and Norvig by Anonymous Coward · 2011-09-26 17:50 · Score: 3, Informative

Grab a copy of Russell and Norvig. It's a nice survey, and a fairly easy read.

Re:Russell and Norvig by ArAgost · 2011-09-26 20:10 · Score: 1

Seconded. There's everything you need, and it's also well written. No wonder it's a de facto standard in universities everywhere.
Re:Russell and Norvig by crow_t_robot · 2011-09-26 21:31 · Score: 2

Seconding this. Norvig is also teaching a free class online next month from this text through Stanford.
Re:Russell and Norvig by somersault · 2011-09-26 23:27 · Score: 2

Good job on reading the entire summary!

--
which is totally what she said
Re:Russell and Norvig by SystemicPlural · 2011-09-27 02:24 · Score: 1

You're right, in that the OP pointed out that they could not attend this, but I didn't know the book was used in the class, so the info was useful nonetheless.
Re:Russell and Norvig by OeLeWaPpErKe · 2011-09-27 04:09 · Score: 2

No the correct answer is : "You want to learn the basics for no other use than misrepresenting it in political discussions ? Please don't."
Re:Russell and Norvig by ArAgost · 2011-09-27 09:09 · Score: 1

You do raise a very interesting point, which would be worth discussing far more than my limited attention span and the hostility to long form writing of this input box allow me to.
I do think that the interest of OP goes beyond the superficial coverage of these topics we often see in press and politics, and this is already made evident by the fact he came here to ask. Moreover, even a cursory read of the Russel-Norvig brings no risk of misrepresentation - that's exactly why I loved that book: clear language, and only good information. I do think that a full-fledged, graduate level AI or game theory of soft computing course would be much more beneficial, but if he cannot invest that kind of resource, we can probably agree that he's better off with a great book than with some random snippets on wikipedia.

I found 'Rock, Paper Scissors' quite accessible by Anonymous Coward · 2011-09-26 17:53 · Score: 1

See: http://www.lenfisherscience.com/books/rock_paper_scissors.html

statistical decision theory by ThorGod · 2011-09-26 17:57 · Score: 4, Interesting

-bone up on your probability (continuous/discrete distributions, transformations, etc)
-grab a book on statistical decision theory like Parmigiani and Inoue or Berger (85).
-read Von Neumann/Morgenstern

--
PS: I don't reply to ACs.

Re:statistical decision theory by scottgfx · 2011-09-26 18:11 · Score: 2

Many years ago I read the book "Prisoner's Dilemma".
Interesting book with a bit of Game Theory and biography of Von Neumann.
Thought it interesting to note that my father's and Von Neumann's lives ever-so-slightly intersected at Operation Crossroads.

--
It's mandatory to wash your hands before returning to the land of Dairy Queen.
Re:statistical decision theory by ThorGod · 2011-09-26 19:47 · Score: 1

Thought it interesting to note that my father's and Von Neumann's lives ever-so-slightly intersected at Operation Crossroads.
That's pretty cool! Never heard of Operation Crossroads before, but it sounds like it was the second nuclear test?

--
PS: I don't reply to ACs.
Re:statistical decision theory by Slugster · 2011-09-26 21:10 · Score: 3, Interesting

-read Von Neumann/Morgenstern
I have the Von Neumann/Morganstern book. It is very heavy reading, Rain-Man level stuff. Unless you're rich or its really cheap, it's a good idea to thumb through a copy before buying.

On the other [fuffy] end of the spectrum is Prisoner's Dilemma by William Poundstone. A 1-2 hour read suitable for teens, with no difficult math and a lot of real-world examples.
Re:statistical decision theory by sammyo · 2011-09-27 01:29 · Score: 2

The first chapters of Theory of Games and Economic Behavior is quite accesable, at least it was when I got my copy in high school. Do to be able to grasp the idea of a matrix.
Re:statistical decision theory by ThorGod · 2011-09-27 05:44 · Score: 1

I'm under the impression that this is a legal source:
http://www.archive.org/details/theoryofgamesand030098mbp
Has pdf/epub/kindle/etc versions of NM. (As well as lots of other good reads!)

--
PS: I don't reply to ACs.

Less Wrong by Bob9113 · 2011-09-26 18:00 · Score: 2, Interesting

I haven't had much time to dig in yet, but I hear good things about Less Wrong from some friends who are into game theory, ai, and sociology.

Here's their front page blurb:

Thinking and deciding are central to our daily lives. The Less Wrong community aims to gain expertise in how human brains think and decide, so that we can do so more successfully. We use the latest insights from cognitive science, social psychology, probability theory, and decision theory to improve our understanding of how the world works and what we can do to achieve our goals.

--
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance

Re:Less Wrong by GrimmParoD · 2011-09-26 21:15 · Score: 2, Funny

You should be careful with communities assembled around prohibited subject matter. Game theory is one thing - Singularity class AI would be so disruptive that it may be assumed unregulated advances in the field could get you 'cleaned up' in pretty short order. People peddling entre into communities gathered around such subjects should be considered suspect unless they openly tell you that any significant contribution will likely come with total loss of your freedoms.

This fact gets conveniently left out of literature from Singularitarians in particular, but should be logically apparent to anyone actually deserving of being included in such an effort. If you must work on AI, either work alone and air-gapped, or alone and on a machine from which you periodically notify the NSA of your intentions to overrun the world with sentient kill-bots. Both of those options are better than walking into what should be an obvious death-trap.

The existence of security based prohibitions may suck, but it doesn't increase freedom to associate with individuals who are so obviously positioning to catch indies in a highly regulated field.

My advice, forget 'game-theory'/AI terminology and work on non-verbal thought processes via extended meditation. If you must use language, develop your own compaction routines with cipher keys bundled for obviousness - don't resort to natural language when attempting to make a leap across semantic boundaries. Trying to separate the expansion of logical processes from the compaction of logical processes is largely useless, and the security bump from obvious behaviors will pay off if you get popped for making progress.

Better to go get laid and have kids if you want to study emergent systems. Just MHO. Now where did I misplace my breeding stock? Hrm... Not here in Mom's basement.. *wanders off*
Re:Less Wrong by Double+Drop · 2011-09-27 00:29 · Score: 1

Surely wins the Slashdot TinFoil Hat Post of the Year Award 2011?

--
WarGear - Risk Everything
Re:Less Wrong by Hatta · 2011-09-27 01:07 · Score: 2

Right at the top of the page they have a line endorsing human rationality. Right next to that is a link to a singularity summit. There is no hint of irony in the juxtaposition. That's a big red flag right there.

--
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Re:Less Wrong by GrimmParoD · 2011-09-27 08:36 · Score: 1

I'm usually going for grimmest parody. The funny part is that I am usually serious as well.

How do they not work?? by SuperKendall · 2011-09-26 18:01 · Score: 3, Insightful

I'm aware of the Stanford on-line classes, but those don't work with my current schedule

Why? You can just watch the videos instead of doing the homework, or watch them sometime later and do the homework then.

But if you really had any interest you would be shifting around everything else, including sleep, to take fullest advantage of these classes in real time.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley

Re:How do they not work?? by manwargi · 2011-09-26 21:23 · Score: 1

Not only that, the AI class has a "light" version that's simpler than the full course.
Re:How do they not work?? by fartrader · 2011-09-26 23:28 · Score: 2

Its a good thing that everyone seems to be clairvoyant and understand how the OP *can* indeed fit it in to his current schedule when he says he can't. Maybe he has a 100 hour a week job, a demanding girlfriend, 200 kids or all three. ...and "interest" doesn't mean you give up sleep. Perhaps if he was interested in two things he should give up eating as well.
Reasonable question asked - with reasonable parameters - unreasonable dissection.
Re:How do they not work?? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-09-26 23:37 · Score: 1

demanding girlfriend - is that what the kids are calling xbox these days?
Re:How do they not work?? by somersault · 2011-09-26 23:44 · Score: 1

Anyone who has any interest but hasn't already looked into it themselves, is not going to be interested in getting up at 4am. Nor do I think it would do much use. Why, if you can watch the video?
Personally I wouldn't even bother with the videos, just read the book.. I might dig it out and see if it has any Lambda Calculus stuff - I'm about to go through Norvig's book on AI/Common Lisp.. and my memory of LC is really rusty.

--
which is totally what she said
Re:How do they not work?? by Threni · 2011-09-26 23:54 · Score: 1

I like how you sarcastically, and unintentionally, give the exact same answer! He doesn't work that long, have that many kids etc, and therefore COULD in fact find the time.
Another possibility is that there's no way for him to learn this stuff as there's no way of doing it without leaving the girlfriend, drowning some kids etc.
Re:How do they not work?? by elsurexiste · 2011-09-27 00:55 · Score: 4, Insightful

Why? You can just watch the videos instead of doing the homework, or watch them sometime later and do the homework then.
Maybe xmojox isn't around a PC for hours, because of his/her job, and spend a few more hours commuting. Maybe he/she has no tablet that's easily carried. We are not to judge. If we don't believe what's telling us, we may as well think this question is just an attempt at trollling and stop wasting our times.

But if you really had any interest you would be shifting around everything else, including sleep, to take fullest advantage of these classes in real time.
Worst. Advice. Ever. If you don't sleep at least six hours, you'll notice. It isn't sustainable.
On topic: Check Wikipedia's page for Game Theory and go to the citations. There you'll find a few books and other resources you can read.

--
I rarely respond to comments. Also, don't ask for clarifications: a brain and Google are faster, believe me!
Re:How do they not work?? by fartrader · 2011-09-27 02:07 · Score: 2

ah that's because unlike the other posters I am in fact clairvoyant :)
Re:How do they not work?? by HeckRuler · 2011-09-27 02:21 · Score: 1, Troll

Hi Fart rader,
I'm interested in subject X, could you help out? I know that I could go google things, work through tutorials, and browse the communities that are dedicated to subject X, but I want your input. Also my schedule is pretty busy. So I'm looking for some way to spend zero time to get real meaningful advances.
Re:How do they not work?? by xmojox · 2011-09-27 02:34 · Score: 1

Between work and other studying obligations (which my job depends on) ... I can't commit myself to that kind of structure. If I just could download the videos or watch them at any time, likes month or so after they have been posted then I could do it. Any idea if this is possible?
Re:How do they not work?? by Rakishi · 2011-09-27 04:28 · Score: 1

Having actually taken both of the classes in question at Stanford I'd disagree. They're useful but it's not god shoving knowledge into your head. If you can learn from a book (seriously learn, not half ass it) then just go with that.
Plus, you can already get the machine learning class videos (and a few other ones):
http://see.stanford.edu/see/courses.aspx
Re:How do they not work?? by Rakishi · 2011-09-27 04:32 · Score: 1

An older version of the machine learning class videos actually given at Stanford is available here:
http://see.stanford.edu/see/courses.aspx
Despite the title saying "Machine Learning| Artificial Intelligence" it seems to be only the Machine Learning class.
That said, the AI class may be more useful for you unless you plan to do hardcore machine learning. The AI class seems to go over a broader set of machine learning topics than the ML class. I'm guessing the AI class will cover it's topics in less detail.
Re:How do they not work?? by mattack2 · 2011-09-27 13:49 · Score: 1

But if he has ANY time to learn something.. How would he by definition NOT have time to watch a video he can watch whenever he wants... but WOULD have time to read a book or something?
(The only reasonable case I can think of would be time on a subway or bus without a net connection -- I have no idea if the Stanford videos are downloadable to watch offline.)
Re:How do they not work?? by manwargi · 2011-09-27 13:56 · Score: 1

If the OP isn't even willing to attempt the casual watered down version of an already free class and it didn't occur to him to read the book, or even a book on the subject, then I guess he has no choice but to hook himself up to the Nebuchadnezzar through a socket in the back of his neck and download the information he seeks.
Re:How do they not work?? by Dr+Max · 2011-09-27 15:30 · Score: 1

I think it's the same course just minus the assignments and exams and you don't get the same certificate.

--
Rocket Surgeon.

Game Theory - The Great Courses by slasher999 · 2011-09-26 18:05 · Score: 2

I purchased a course from "The Great Courses" on DVD last year (thegreatcourses.com), the topic of which was Game Theory. I've enjoyed the first half of the course, but haven't completed it. Unfortunately whenever I get time to go back to it, it has been long enough that I tend to start back at the beginning and watch the entire course over.

Re:Game Theory - The Great Courses by wienerschnizzel · 2011-09-26 19:47 · Score: 1

These are awesome courses! Especially if you are new to the field. There are a couple of them that might interest you - the course on Game Theory, taught by a matemetician, focuses on the theory itself, although it gives some real life and historical scenarios of how game theory should be (or was) applied.
Then there is a course on Conflict Resolution which discusses a lot of the themes from Game Theory applied to real life and another course on Leadership that discusses a lot of historical examples of failures or successes of political or entrepreneurial campains.

perceptrons is a start by jimmydevice · 2011-09-26 18:12 · Score: 1

Read perceptrons, I'm sure a copy exists in your local college library.

Re:perceptrons is a start by DanDD · 2011-09-26 19:37 · Score: 1

But then some asshat named Marvin would point out, in the most malicious way, how there can be no guarantee of linear separation between joke and troll...

--
"Every time I see an adult on a bicycle, I no longer despair for the future of the human race." - H. G. Wells

Re:Jesus christ learn to schedule your time by Anonymous Coward · 2011-09-26 18:19 · Score: 1

I guess he knows something about using his time, after all, since he didn't answer you.

Re:Jesus christ learn to schedule your time by Anonymous Coward · 2011-09-26 18:24 · Score: 1

AHAHAHAHA oh snap!

readings by Anonymous Coward · 2011-09-26 18:25 · Score: 1

After you go thru the usual stuff (Intro to AI, on-line courses, et al)
Game Theory and Decision Theory in Agent-Based Systems ISBN 978-1-4020-7115-7
Game Theory: Analysis of Conflict ISBN 978-0674341166
Hope this helps.

Re:Jesus christ learn to schedule your time by mikael_j · 2011-09-26 18:28 · Score: 1, Insightful

One possibility here is of course that the original poster knows that the field is quite large and isn't interested in studying it intensely for several years. In that case it can be good to ask those who already have studied the field for pointers to figure out just which things are most essential to learn about, which books are likely to be most useful and such things. Basically, the original poster may just be trying to avoid wasting his/her time studying more or less irrelevant parts of the field (anyone who has ever gone through a few college courses in a technical field should know what I'm talking about here, there are plenty of textbooks out there that imply pretty heavily that specific peripheral details are somehow core concepts when in reality you could spend a day or two on them and learn all you'll reasonably need to know about them, I myself have a book somewhere in storage which confused me to no end when I was in high school, it went on for page after page after page about linked lists like they were the only thing that mattered to computer science when it could've just explained the concept, what they were good for and then moved on).

--
Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4

Russell & Norvig by Black+Parrot · 2011-09-26 18:38 · Score: 4, Informative

Read Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, 3rd edition. It's supposedly the most-used AI textbook in the world.

It's weak on the biologically inspired methods (genetic algorithms, neural networks, fuzzy logic), but very solid in "Good Old Fashioned AI" (GOFAI) and some of the decision-making procedures from other fields such as economics.

If you don't have a background in CS, you'll need to work through a book on discrete math first.

--
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade

Re:Russell & Norvig by liamoshan · 2011-09-26 22:47 · Score: 1

+1 for this book. It was the only textbook in my uni study that I read cover to cover like a novel. It's exceptionally well written an accessible

Comment removed by account_deleted · 2011-09-26 18:42 · Score: 1

Comment removed based on user account deletion

F.A. Hayek's "The Fatal Conceit" by bitbucketeer · 2011-09-26 18:48 · Score: 1

Central planning doesn't work nearly as well as decentralization of knowledge does.

Re:F.A. Hayek's "The Fatal Conceit" by migla · 2011-09-26 21:11 · Score: 1

Maybe I'm off on a tangent or somewhere completely different alltogether, but...
How about decentralization of planning, too? If everyone that wanted to could be part of decision making. That would probably be the best and most democratic (obviously) way? In this age of the internet, it should not be that hard to implement technically, either.
AFAICS, the only reason not to increase democracy to an extreme is the possibility that democracy really isn't good for people. And even if that were true, it must still be the only right thing to do, IMO.

--
Some of my favourite people are from th US; Vonnegut, Chomsky, Bill Hicks.
Re:F.A. Hayek's "The Fatal Conceit" by GrimmParoD · 2011-09-26 22:11 · Score: 1

"If everyone that wanted to could be part of decision making."
The bigger problem is all the people that don't want to be involved in planning, but want to remain employed/in good graces/not drawn outside the lines. Solve the organizational problem of perceived proximity to satisfaction and you might have a stab at making this work. Unfortunately, it is all too easy to make a human believe that the distance between current position and satisfaction is variable according to externally controlled factors. The distance is always equal to the duration of the urge, no more or less.

More plainly, the same problems that beset Tammany Hall will continue in Democratic structures until people accept the transient nature of life, risk, and reward. Beyond that developmental point, Democracy can't be beaten. Until then, you require periodic cleanings to break the behavioral patterns of people who subject themselves to both physical and mental intimidation or you end up with slave enforced plantation systems that get validated each election cycle. MTV's "Rock The Vote" and head-cracking Labor Union mobilizations are equally destructive to the process of distributing the power of governance.

The best way to learn is to do it by Unoriginal_Nickname · 2011-09-26 18:49 · Score: 3, Interesting

The best way to learn is to do it. Choose a "game" and try to solve it with some different approaches. I say "game" with quotes because the game you pick should definitely not be a game which a normal adult would choose to play, but something very young children would play, or a heavily simplified variant of a full game. Something like Tic-Tac-Toe or RPS.

RPS seems trivial, but it's actually a very interesting game to study. It's an easy-to-understand example of how a Nash equilibrium strategy doesn't always produce an optimal outcome. The equilibrium strategy is to choose between the three moves at random, but you can't naively use the strategy because it offers no way of taking advantage of weak opponents, such as an opponent that favors a particular move or a pattern of moves. Computer RPS tournaments will always include a variety of bots that are predictably weak in various ways, to separate out the good bots that are capable of using these weaknesses.

Another simple game you could experiment with is Leduc Poker. Leduc Poker is another matrix game, and it's simple enough that you can easily compute the Nash equilibrium (which, remember, is not necessarily optimal, but it's a good starting point) or iterate over the entire game tree. You could also use a similar subset of poker to experiment with more advanced techniques - e.g. minimax and alphabeta pruning, or maybe Monte Carlo Tree Search (I can't guarantee that MCTS would work for poker, I'm not sure it's ever been done, but it might be interesting to try.)

Re:The best way to learn is to do it by Rockoon · 2011-09-26 23:36 · Score: 2

In all likelihood, the OP doesnt actually want to learn AI but rather the related subject of Machine Learning.

The problem with tackling AI is in fact everything you were talking about. Pick a simple game, write a player for it, etc, where the answer is nearly always some form of tree search leveraging hard-coded knowledge (chess-like) or simple Bayesian derivations using hard-coded knowledge (poker-like.) While that stuff (and path finding) is the mainstay of popularized AI, its both limiting and non-interesting unless you actually care about the specific game (chess engine authors love chess, not AI.. poker bot authors love poker, not AI..)

It is through the act of a program itself learning the knowledge necessary that makes AI both enjoyable and powerful. I can teach you a tree searching algorithm in a single day.. and I can teach you a machine learning algorithm like actor-critic in a single day.. only the later will reward you for a lifetime.

--
"His name was James Damore."

One thing is for certain. by v(*_*)vvvv · 2011-09-26 18:52 · Score: 2

Some think that artificial intelligence seeks to emulate the real intelligence of humans. But most of it is just software, and has little to do with real intelligence.

There are certain problems that AI can solve, but those solutions are not "intelligent" but rather are merely "formulas" programmed by intelligent people (computer scientists).

We get excited when these formulas emulate what a real person might do, and when we can hide the underlying machine, but that is not to say we know how people think or even how we are implemented. We are just getting better at programming.

There are some great advancements in cognitive science, and the more we discover about how the brain works, the less it looks like it could be run by any "code". No intel inside. The brain is an organ that grows and dies, and takes its memories with it. If anything, it programs itself.

That is not to say there haven't been advancements in AI. It too is incredibly useful.

A good place to start:
http://www.ted.com/search?q=brain
http://www.ted.com/search?q=artificial+intelligence ... and wikipedia of course...

Re:One thing is for certain. by v(*_*)vvvv · 2011-09-27 10:44 · Score: 1

Software can emulate anything. A good example may be video games. Software can create gravity and realistic 3D environments and everything else, but that isn't to say anything that it creates is itself "software". AI is the same.
There is no real gravity in the computer, and the computer doesn't create real gravity.
There is no real intelligence in the computer, and the computer doesn't create real intelligence.
Computer running software may be a good analogy to the brain running whatever it runs. But it is only an analogy.

Re:Stanford AI and Game Theory? by Needlzor · 2011-09-26 18:58 · Score: 5, Informative

www.ai-class.org, by Sebastian Thrun and Peter Norvig

You might try Economics instead. by meburke · 2011-09-26 19:15 · Score: 3, Insightful

Not to belittle your choices, but this is a VERY complicated subject. My favorite introductions to game theory are, "The Compleat Strategyst" by Williams, and, "Strategy in Poker, Business and War" by McDonald. These are not trivial books, but they are easy reads into the uses of Game Theory.

After that, you get into some Math. Read anything you can on Probability and Risk; know your Statistics and Calculus. Much of what you are looking for will be found under the subject "Decision Theory."

I say study Economics because this is where political and economic scientific thought is making the greatest gains at this time. Game theory has a lot to do with "payoff" and Economics is a fertile field for studying payoffs. (So is Political Science, and there some good laboratories in, say, Afghanistan, Mexico and Chicago. But that's a slightly different, pragmatic, field of study.)

My favorite definition of "politics" is: "The behavior of vying for scarce rewards." This is almost exactly a definition for Economics. At one time Economics was thought to be a sub-level of politics; it now seems the opposite is true.

Hayak pretty much proved that economic behavior cannot be quantified because of the complexity. What is useful is deriving principles of actions under a variety of conditions to provide maximum payoffs, for the most people, under the widest variety of conditions. (An alternative course is to try to derive the largest payoffs for the fewest people under specific conditions.) AutoDesk used to have an Artificial Life laboratory that you could manipulate to learn about Genetic Algorithms and other AI behavior. Context-dependent AI can be learned through developing Neural Nets. Some of the guys I've talked to at Carnegie Mellon in the Quantitative Economics studies have warring economic artificial hybrid GA/Neural Nets, and the observations are pretty interesting.

If it was simply a matter of rational decision making, optimum economic strategies could probably be described and tested in a much smaller AI field. However, politics and economics are burdened with mis-perceptions, human values, and stubborn beliefs. This is a big field, and you should be able to enjoy it as a hobby for the rest of your life without running into a limit of learning.

--
"The mind works quicker than you think!"

Re:You might try Economics instead. by xmojox · 2011-09-27 02:48 · Score: 1

I have and currently do study Economics which is what has started my interest into AI and GT. Now this ... > Carnegie Mellon in the Quantitative Economics studies have warring economic artificial hybrid GA/Neural Nets, and the observations are pretty interesting. Sounds very interesting to me and more to the point of my interest in the subjects.
Re:You might try Economics instead. by whyrat · 2011-09-27 06:41 · Score: 1

I'd recommend narrowing "economics" down to just of the sub-field of microeconomics; behavioral economics in particular. These focus on the actions of a single agent (or small number of agents). Wikipedia link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioral_economics Most of macroeconomics looks at the systems that result out of a large number of agents acting independently, which isn't what I infer the OP is looking for (there's little overlap between AI and things like: theory of money; aggregate supply / demand; role of government; international trade; etc). There are certainly people looking at simulating these with multiple AI players... but I doubt the field is that far along yet as we're still working to model the AI of a single individual.

AI: Stanford by xtracto · 2011-09-26 19:23 · Score: 1

For AI, I would suggest enrolling into the Stanford Artificial Intelligence Course. It will start on October 10th this year and lasts until December (I think).

--
Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'

Re:AI: Stanford by Fnord666 · 2011-09-27 04:35 · Score: 1

OP

"I would like to learn more about Artificial Intelligence and Game Theory. I know these are both large areas of study; however, my main interest is in how these affect decisions in the world. This would include politicians, business people, and general society. I'm not looking for a career or anything; this is just a personal interest of mine. Where are good places to start in these areas for somebody new to them? I'm aware of the Stanford on-line classes, but those don't work with my current schedule."
Reply

For AI, I would suggest enrolling into the Stanford Artificial Intelligence Course. It will start on October 10th this year and lasts until December (I think).
Good old slashdot, where reading the question asked before answering is just too damn much trouble.

--
'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables

Braitenburg and Dawkins by DanDD · 2011-09-26 19:27 · Score: 2

First, read up on Braitenburg Vehicles and The Selfish Gene, by Richard Dawkins. Dawkins is something of a deity in the annals of evolutionary biology and is worthy of worship :-p

Then read up on Neural Networks, start simple with a feed-forward with error backprop.

Then try your hand at some Temporal Difference Learning.

Then take a look at genetic algorithms, but it might help you to first understand the classic A* heuristic search algorithm. Genetic algorithms tend to be interesting search algorithms that are inspired by a genetic process, but they have little connection to the actual biological process for which they are named, so I am biased against them. This perception could just be a local cognitive minima that might be avoided with better training.

--
"Every time I see an adult on a bicycle, I no longer despair for the future of the human race." - H. G. Wells

Re:Braitenburg and Dawkins by Rockoon · 2011-09-27 01:18 · Score: 2

Genetic algorithms tend to be interesting search algorithms that are inspired by a genetic process, but they have little connection to the actual biological process for which they are named, so I am biased against them. This perception could just be a local cognitive minima that might be avoided with better training.
Just stop using the name 'genetic algorithm' when thinking about them.

Begin with a straightforward randomized state-space search method, simply remember the candidate solution with the best score. How can that be improved upon? We could keep a record of many of these randomized candidate solutions and their scores and derive new candidates using various methodologies, such as combining parts of two different candidates into a new candidate and then randomizing only minor parts of these new candidates. We can call this the 'directed randomized search method' where the performance of past candidate solutions influence the generation of new candidate solutions.

And there you go.. the 'Directed Randomized Search Method' AKA 'Genetic Algorithm'

What isnt so obvious is that once you start thinking about it like this, you have a greater understanding of the roles of population size, mutation rate, elitism, and so on, as well as the effects of population convergence and other observations about the population, and that the enforcement of 'generations' has no beneficial qualities (ie: it is much better to generate one new candidate at a time and moving that new information into the population immediately so that it can be leveraged immediately)

--
"His name was James Damore."

Will Chris Crawford's Tomes Help? by cmholm · 2011-09-26 19:35 · Score: 1

Not knowing exactly what level of knowledge you're starting from... One of my first game purchases was Patton Versus Rommel, which included some artificial smarts. The liner notes included a reference to his second book The Art of Computer Design, [PDF] and based on the context, I hoped it might include at least introductory pointers to game AI. Nope. There's also Chris Crawford on Game Design, [Google Books]. It does include some high level designs, which may or may not be what you're looking for.

--
Luke, help me take this mask off ... Just for once, let me butterfly kiss you with my own eyes.

Re:Jesus christ learn to schedule your time by crutchy · 2011-09-26 19:37 · Score: 1

I've been in the same boat as the OP. I did research it and its wide and varied.

If you don't understand the question, why the hell did you post an answer?

Mod: Troll

Open Online Courses by jsse · 2011-09-26 19:45 · Score: 1

Are available here.

Happy studying.

Book by Anonymous Coward · 2011-09-26 19:47 · Score: 1

May I suggest the following book:

Multiagent Systems
Algorithmic, Game-Theoretic, and Logical Foundations
Yoav Shoham
Stanford University
Kevin Leyton-Brown
University of British Columbia

http://www.masfoundations.org/index.html

Re:Book by thecounterweight · 2011-09-27 11:04 · Score: 1

Seconded.

Game Theory: A Critical Introduction by mrogers · 2011-09-26 20:07 · Score: 3

The best technical introduction to game theory I've come across is Game Theory: A Critical Introduction by Shaun P. Hargreaves-Heap and Yanis Varoufakis, which introduces the most important concepts while placing them within their philosophical context (for example, to what extent is it reasonable to regard humans as the kind of agents assumed by game theory?). I've been studying game theory for years and wish I'd read this book a long time ago.

If you really have no patience for philosophy, try Game Theory for Applied Economists by Robert Gibbons instead. ;-)

John Maynard Smith's Evolution and the Theory of Games is accessible and indispensable.

Less technical works that explore the implications of the theory in fascinating ways include The Evolution of Cooperation (the book that first got me interested in the subject) and The Complexity of Cooperation by Robert Axelrod, and anything by Brian Skyrms.

Yale course "Game Theory" on Youtube by tsvk · 2011-09-26 20:09 · Score: 2

Here is the complete Youtube playlist for the Yale course "Game Theory", lectured by Ben Polak. 24 lectures in total, about 1 h 15 min each.

Course description: This course is an introduction to game theory and strategic thinking. Ideas such as dominance, backward induction, Nash equilibrium, evolutionary stability, commitment, credibility, asymmetric information, adverse selection, and signaling are discussed and applied to games played in class and to examples drawn from economics, politics, the movies, and elsewhere.

I have had the intention of watching through this, but haven't had the time after the first few lectures. The material is recommended, though.

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6EF60E1027E1A10B

Good game theory books I keep on my shelf: by tlambert · 2011-09-26 20:11 · Score: 3, Informative

Good game theory books I keep on my shelf:

Nonlinear Dynamics, Mathematical Biology, and Social Science (Santa Fe Institute Studies in the Sciences of Complexity Lecture Notes)
by Joshua Epstein
Westview Press
ISBN: 9780201419887
(if you know enough math for partial differential equations, this book is a must-have, since it's directly applicable to mathematically modelling open source software projects)

The Evolution of Cooperation
by Robert Axelrod and William D. Hamilton
Paper: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.147.9644&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Book: ISBN 0-465-02122-2
Perspectives on Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems
Basic Books
ISBN: 9780195162929

The Complexity of Cooperation: Agent-Based Models of Competition and Collaboration
by Robert Axelrod
Princeton University Press
ISBN 978-0691015675

Game Theory and the Social Contract, Vol. 1: Playing Fair
by Ken Binmore
MIT Press
ISBN 978-0262023634

Game Theory and the Social Contract, Vol. 2: Just Playing (Economic Learning and Social Evolution)
by Ken Binmore
MIT Press
ISBN 978-0262024440

Analyzing Policy: Choices, Conflicts, and Practice
by Michael C. Munger
W. W. Norton & Company
ISBN 978-0393973990

Growing Artificial Societies: Social Science from the Bottom Up (Complex Adaptive Systems
by Joshua M. Epstein, Robert L. Axtell
MIT Press
ISBN 978-0262550253

Slashdot Mirror

Ask Slashdot: Best Way To Learn About Game Theory and AI?

87 of 152 comments (clear)