4 ms·

Starting variation (like Arimaa), takes opening books off the table. In general, high branching factors (possible moves at any situation) are more difficult. Hu

Starting variation (like Arimaa), takes opening books off the table. In general, high branching factors (possible moves at any situation) are more difficult. Humans have an intuitive sense for which moves are reasonable at any situation, or whether a line of play is productive. Branching factor is part of why Go was so much harder than chess. Hidden information is hard: computers are not good at the "thinking in another's shoes" and inferring hidden facts from known ones, or are too easily tricked by ploys. Poker is an extremely simple hidden information game, but as I understand it, the AIs are still behind humans. Ease of position evaluation is also very important to computers. No one has made a general Magic The Gathering AI that is even mediocre at the game, because it is extremely difficult to heuristically evaluate a general boardstate. There are many non-linearities, and the value of cards is heavily situation and strategy dependent.

tialaramex 6y ago
You're definitely wrong about Poker. The state of the art for Poker goes like this: Heads Up Limit Texas Hold 'Em is effectively solved. http://poker.srv.ualberta.ca/ http://poker.srv.ualberta.ca/ Not just "There's an AI which is very good at it" there is literally a fixed strategy I can reveal in advance and that strategy will statistically break even against an equally efficient strategy or else gradually take all your chips if you don't have a similar perfect strategy. Even though you know exactly what the strategy is, you can't beat it anyway. At No Limit the clear champion is AI. Pluribus, Libratus and Deepstack all play clearly better poker, it's not practical to conceive a "solved" or even "near solved" like Cepheus strategy for No Limit, but the AI is tireless and it's disheartening for humans to just find every strategy countered so I expect them to get worse not better. I don't expect any further exhibition type matches for AI versus professionals at poker because of this success. Now, full ring is different, but largely because of the social dynamics. If you're at a table with six humans and one AI, obviously all of the humans will co-operate to force out the AI since the alternative is the AI wins. So that's not a very interesting problem.

tialaramex 6y ago

You're definitely wrong about Poker. The state of the art for Poker goes like this: Heads Up Limit Texas Hold 'Em is effectively solved. http://poker.srv.ualberta.ca/ http://poker.srv.ualberta.ca/ Not just "There's an AI which is very good at it" there is literally a fixed strategy I can reveal in advance and that strategy will statistically break even against an equally efficient strategy or else gradually take all your chips if you don't have a similar perfect strategy. Even though you know exactly what the strategy is, you can't beat it anyway. At No Limit the clear champion is AI. Pluribus, Libratus and Deepstack all play clearly better poker, it's not practical to conceive a "solved" or even "near solved" like Cepheus strategy for No Limit, but the AI is tireless and it's disheartening for humans to just find every strategy countered so I expect them to get worse not better. I don't expect any further exhibition type matches for AI versus professionals at poker because of this success. Now, full ring is different, but largely because of the social dynamics. If you're at a table with six humans and one AI, obviously all of the humans will co-operate to force out the AI since the alternative is the AI wins. So that's not a very interesting problem.