Artificial Intuition

Started by
56 comments, last by Paul Cunningham 23 years, 1 month ago
It sounds like a very good way to go to me pax. Because it''s feasible. Hmmm

I love Game Design and it loves me back.

Our Goal is "Fun"!
Advertisement
Woohoo, somebody liked my idea!!

In trying to develop good AI, I look at myself. Why do I do things? What''s my motivation and what external influences do I experience? How can I represent that on a computer?

In any situation, there''s a mood, hence the mood determination net (can also be used for selecting appropriate music?). Then using the mood and other input (each of the relationship outputs and maybe one for the location) I determine what I want to do. This can be weighted by my goals, schedule, priorities and personality/values.

The problem with AI is that there are so many factors to realistic behavior, both internal and external.


Pax
p
Well, I was watching a fascinating program last night on the evolution of the idea Science has had about the importance of the brain. And they showed that lobsters for instance, have a dramatically simple nervous system, and yet has to deal with 8 legs plus 2 arms when walking onland. Just to say that there seem to be some hope of simulating all this in a simple way. Of course, it will only be simple when we figure it out.

Maybe if we deal with tanks being very simple beings (I just can''t forget my first program, an ant simulator in BASIC, very nice emerging behaviour, that''s probably what started me in studying all this computer crap rather than Fine Arts)

maybe we could do something. So the question is, what kind of input and stats do we give to a tank.
I am also thinking, for my MAsters, about seeing all this as a multi scalar problem. The tank is a being, but on another scale, the tank is just a "cell", an arm, of a greater being, a group for instance; which is itself a part of a greater body, etc.
Can all this speed up some processes, this is what I expect to see.

So any idea how we could model a "unit" on the battlefield. For the sake of argument, let''s take the RTS context, unless you see a better context ? (NOT RPG. There is way too much stuff to take into account)
-----------------------------Sancte Isidore ora pro nobis !
Finally! I can post! (I''ve been having trouble postsing ever since they made the upgrade to the message boards)

Pax, I like your idea, very similar to the one I suggested not 5 posts earlier. Correct me if I''m wrong, but I think you''re suggesting that you use an ANN for every unit, and then a master one for everything. Each of those nets on their own is feasible, as Paul suggests, but as a whole, when there''s 200 units on the board? You''d probably see that ANN routine slowly eat up your processor time as the game got bigger. But I do like the ANN determining the mood; if you look at my suggestion buried deep within another one of my posts you''ll find they''re very similar. I like your term better than mine too.

Guess great minds really do think alike.

Eric


===============
"Or a pointed stick!"
==============="Or a pointed stick!"
quote:Original post by ahw

Well, I was watching a fascinating program last night on the evolution of the idea Science has had about the importance of the brain. And they showed that lobsters for instance, have a dramatically simple nervous system, and yet has to deal with 8 legs plus 2 arms when walking onland. Just to say that there seem to be some hope of simulating all this in a simple way. Of course, it will only be simple when we figure it out.


ahw, you (and everyone else) should check this out:

http://www.frams.poznan.pl/

It''s Framsticks, an AL simulation. I can''t do it justice explaining it here.... you''ll have to check it out for yourself.

Perhaps there''s something in it for unit AI?

Here''s a good question: Does better unit AI make the system more intuitive with emergent properties???

Eric



===============
"Or a pointed stick!"
==============="Or a pointed stick!"
No one ... can tell you what the Framsticks is. You''ll have to see it for yourself. LOL

God, it''s that time of the night again.
-----------------------------Sancte Isidore ora pro nobis !
ahw: Your multi-scalar idea is called heirarchal AI and is being used or at least investigated for RTS games. The way they use it is that there is an AI for the player, an AI for each group of units and an AI for each unit. The player AI determines overall strategy and assigns tasks to the groups. The group AI determines how to best complete its task, and the individual AI determine how they complete their own part of the task.


Pax
p
I think that the only feasable option in using a NN for RTS AI (how''s that for acronyms?) would be as an overall strategy-controller. From my (1 hour) research, NN''s use a good deal of processing power. Individual unit AI should be built in at the most basic level. For instance, in my RTS-under-construction, in the damage-dealing routine, I check for any units that got hurt and tell them, based on their power and the attacking unit''s power, to attack that unit or retreat. Then I take any other unit that could see the unit that got hurt, and repeat the process for them. So, if you attack a group of marines with one marine, that marine and all the ones near it will attack your unit back immediately. The same thing goes if the computer attacks your units.

Where the NN would come in would be in telling the computer how to best build a base, when to go beyond friendly territory and build a new base, when to make an attack, which units to build given certain conditions, etc. What I''m talking about is a mostly factory-trained AI-NN, and letting it learn on the players'' computers, too. So, if the standard set of strategies fails miserably, the computer would start experimenting, and when something starts working well (this is where NN''s are awesome), it would slowly become the natural thing for the AI to do. And if the player changes his strategies again, well, it''s no problem for more than a few games.

BTW, is there a tutorial out there to build a neural net in C++? I''m not sure I fully understand the underlying concepts. I have a book, "Neural Nets in C++", but it is from 1992 and WAY outdated before the ANSI C++ standard, so the coding is a bit wierd. Plus, the associated source is on a 5 1/4" floppy...

~BenDilts( void );
Beandog:

Hi, personally I prefer to read through algorithms and implement them by myself.
No need to buy books like "....using C++" gfx/NN whatever.

They are usually quite badly written.

Anyone has the same opinions?



/Mankind gave birth to God.
/Mankind gave birth to God.
A good reference for ANNs is the follwing, although it's not really a tutorial.
com.ai.neural-nets FAQ
This, on the other hand, is a good place to learn algorithms (implementation not included):
Backpropagator's Review
Another link, explaining a different kind of ANN, perhaps more useful:
Self-Organising Maps

===============
"Or a pointed stick!"


Edited by - egerlach on August 9, 2000 12:39:23 PM
==============="Or a pointed stick!"

This topic is closed to new replies.

Advertisement