6 ms·
The idea is to see if the bot is playing as smart as a human. To measure this, you must factor out any advantages not available to humans. This is valuable feed
by defertoreptar 7y ago
The idea is to see if the bot is playing as smart as a human. To measure this, you must factor out any advantages not available to humans. This is valuable feedback when developing an intelligent agent, but that doesn't mean you can't remove those artificial handicaps once going to production with something like self-driving cars.
Edit:
Alphastar does already factor out reaction time:
“We measured how quickly it reacts to things,” Silver said. “If you measure the time between when AlphaStar perceives the game. From when it observes what’s going on, then has to process it, and then communicate what it chooses back to the game. That time is actually closer to 350ms. That’s on the slow side of human players.” https://venturebeat.com/2019/01/24/alphastar-deepmind-beats-starcraft-pros/ https://venturebeat.com/2019/01/24/alphastar-deepmind-beats-...
- DiogenesKynikos 7y ago> Alphastar does already factor out reaction time That may be true in some narrow technical sense, but it was heavily disputed by the StarCraft community. If you watch the exposition games, AlphaStar has superhuman ability to micro-control its units one-by-one during critical battles, which allowed it to beat its human opponents even when its army was far inferior on paper.
- tempestn 7y agoIts APM and APS have been decreased since the exposition games due to feedback from pro players.
- JyB 7y agoNot sure why you are getting downvoted. Upon closer inspection it was indeed perceived as contrary to what was expected from the StarCraft community. (And rightfully so)
- Nuzzerino 7y agoHere is a detailed post which covers the specifics: https://www.alexirpan.com/2019/02/22/alphastar.html https://www.alexirpan.com/2019/02/22/alphastar.html