It contains paragraphs like this from me:
"I believe that bots will eventually become smart
"enough to use dynamic strategy against their
"opponents, even if it may not happen soon.
Even if not fully interlocking with mine, Patti Beadles'
ideas are very similar and contributive to the subject
of future AI bots.
On 11/8/2022 5:58 PM, MK wrote:
It contains paragraphs like this from me:
"I believe that bots will eventually become smart
"enough to use dynamic strategy against their
"opponents, even if it may not happen soon.
I've probably mentioned this before here on r.g.b.,
but already in 1999 there had been held a computer
roshambo (rock-paper-scissors) tournament that
had demonstrated the concept of exploiting the
opponent's weaknesses.
Of course, it was impossible to gain an advantage
in head-to-head play against the "optimal" strategy
of purely random choices, but the top programs
scored massively better than the "optimal" strategy
did in the round-robin tournament.
If you think you understand my argument, can you make
a clear statement on whether you agree or disagree with
me? In other words, are you still arguing that there is and
always will be an "optimal strategy" in bg/gg such that no
other deviating strategy will be able to gain an advantage
against it?
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 297 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 17:14:59 |
Calls: | 6,667 |
Calls today: | 1 |
Files: | 12,216 |
Messages: | 5,336,854 |