You think I'm joking? I'm an AI researcher, with 4 years neural network experience under my belt. I mean REAL AI too.
Interesting piece of work, I would like to know how you define AI. And for that matter, how you define real AI. I could do this by email, but I could not find yours:-(
What they are talking about is not AI, the term AI is just used as a word for computers flexibility in tactics and strategies, and several other things. This is only a little comment, but it is confusions like these that makes game developers, scientists and so on to have a bad picture of what is possible and what is impossible.
AI is impossible with todays mathematics. But with all the confusion and all the buzz-words, people think AI can be made, or that it is already here.
Think one more second, if a computer had AI it would start reasoning about the world, why it is here, what it should do, make observations from the world and react to that. Even if the computers "world" is just the game.
What if the AI in a game figured out that war is a bad thing, and it became peaceful, trying to reason with you to stop the war.
AI is a very bad word for computer-based players. Depending on your search algorithm, how complex the game is (I don't know how to measure the complexity, but I'm sure someone has a good way of doing it) and how fast your computer is, makes your computer have more or less AI?
AI is (by my definition) learning, making own general rules from specific cases. The computer has to make observations of the real world (say, the real world would be the game), set up a hypothesis and make a formal description (theory).
The next step is the interpretation of the theory. To be able to set up a model (set-theoretical model), and to use this for predictions. It must also be able to change the theories if a wrong induction was made.
If a computer can do this, it is AI (this is, with todays mathematics, impossible). Having "fuzzy logic" or "neural nets" does not make AI, it simply makes the predictions of the computer more difficult, and might make the computer more flexible to other tactics/strategies. But is certainly does not make the computer to have AI.
For further information, please read "Computerized Agents from a Linguistic Perspective" by Bertil Ekdahl (my teacher). Or reply to this:-)
Slashdot Mirror
I ran http://slashdot.org through the validator (http://validator.w3.org), and it puked.
:-)
The sad part of this is that this is common among almost every major website. Nobody follows the standards.
I hate the web
You think I'm joking? I'm an AI researcher, with 4 years neural network experience under my belt. I mean REAL AI too.
Interesting piece of work, I would like to know how you define AI. And for that matter, how you define real AI. I could do this by email, but I could not find yours
Thank you :-)
:-)
What they are talking about is not AI, the term AI is just used as a word for computers flexibility in tactics and strategies, and several other things. This is only a little comment, but it is confusions like these that makes game developers, scientists and so on to have a bad picture of what is possible and what is impossible.
AI is impossible with todays mathematics. But with all the confusion and all the buzz-words, people think AI can be made, or that it is already here.
Think one more second, if a computer had AI it would start reasoning about the world, why it is here, what it should do, make observations from the world and react to that. Even if the computers "world" is just the game.
What if the AI in a game figured out that war is a bad thing, and it became peaceful, trying to reason with you to stop the war.
It would be chaotic
AI is a very bad word for computer-based players. Depending on your search algorithm, how complex the game is (I don't know how to measure the complexity, but I'm sure someone has a good way of doing it) and how fast your computer is, makes your computer have more or less AI?
:-)
AI is (by my definition) learning, making own general rules from specific cases. The computer has to make observations of the real world (say, the real world would be the game), set up a hypothesis and make a formal description (theory).
The next step is the interpretation of the theory. To be able to set up a model (set-theoretical model), and to use this for predictions. It must also be able to change the theories if a wrong induction was made.
If a computer can do this, it is AI (this is, with todays mathematics, impossible). Having "fuzzy logic" or "neural nets" does not make AI, it simply makes the predictions of the computer more difficult, and might make the computer more flexible to other tactics/strategies. But is certainly does not make the computer to have AI.
For further information, please read "Computerized Agents from a Linguistic Perspective" by Bertil Ekdahl (my teacher). Or reply to this