Super Smash Bros Professional Destroyed by Machine Learning

cageymaru

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
21,376
So you may have seen humans get destroyed in chess by machine learning and thought that will never happen to me. Then machine learning took over the Go strategy game scene and you probably yawned because you've never thought of playing it. Well a small research team from MIT decided to use deep reinforcement learning to teach a computer how to defeat humans on a Nintendo game console. The computer was taught to play Super Smash Bros with a combination of off the shelf A.I. algorithms. These aren't video game algorithms, but can learn to play if given enough data. Then the research team set the computer to play against itself to learn how to master the game. This was the same strategy used to teach DeepMind AlphaGo to defeat Go players.

Interesting tidbits was that the A.I. reacted within 2 frames or 33ms. The average human has a 200ms reaction time. The A.I. never learned how to use projectiles so they limited the amount of character that it could choose from. The characters that professional players say were the most advanced and hardest to master; turned out to be the same characters that the A.I. was slowest to learn. The A.I. responded so fast to situations that the human players couldn't follow the logic and thought it was weird. The research team is ready to even the playing field by limiting the computer to human reaction times.

Are you ready to lose to a computer playing your favorite game? This is well above an aimbot; this is a competitor that reacts much faster to every situation. What do you think?

One interesting finding was that transfer learning, a hot topic in deep learning, applied across characters. This means that an AI agent trained on, say, a character like Fox McCloud, found its skills also applied to characters like Captain Falcon and Peach as well.

"I suspect transfer learning works because many of the fundamentals (how to move, attacking in the direction of the opponent when they are close) are broadly applicable to any character," Firoiu said.
 

LMT MFA

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 11, 2014
Messages
238
This is what most people who never code or are otherwise not "involved" in computing (and so never get a good idea of how fast even a simple computer calculates things) don't take away from all that nice news about (Semi)Artificial Intelligence. All our notions of (reaction)time go straight out the window.
 

Chupachup

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 12, 2014
Messages
435
Would you like to play a game? Global Thermonuclear War ...

Where are these A.I. freaks so bent on establishing Skynet? Have they not watched ANY of these A.I.-becoming-sentient-equals-humanities-demise movies over the last 40 years? WTF?!
 

AceGoober

Live! Laug[H]! Overclock!
Joined
Jun 25, 2003
Messages
24,426
What if, and this is a big friggin' "if", the AI was to fight a neural opponent? What if the physical human reaction was taken out of the equation and limited to a neural network? Something I believe needs to be thought about.
 

piscian18

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
11,021
As someone who cant beat the CPU on Strreet Fighter as it stands now I'm not impressed.
 

DooLocsta

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 26, 2005
Messages
1,757
Would you like to play a game? Global Thermonuclear War ...

Where are these A.I. freaks so bent on establishing Skynet? Have they not watched ANY of these A.I.-becoming-sentient-equals-humanities-demise movies over the last 40 years? WTF?!

Joshua is whispering in their ears.
 

westrock2000

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
9,360
This guy Darbian, holds the record for speed run on Super Mario Bros (so his channel says).

He made a video that explained all the details about the mechanics of Super Mario Bros. It was amazing to watch. You would think a game like Super Mario Bros is simple, but he makes it complex. I'm impressed by the deep learning of just normal humans sometimes.

 

davethehedgehog

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 14, 2017
Messages
195
I don't know why people are impressed with this stuff any more. It's hardly surprising that something that can make literally billions of calculations per second is faster than a human. The whole reason it's impressive for a human to do these things is is because it's difficult. It's like people who are more impressed by CGI than practical effects in movies still. The value is in the art, not just in the result.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Madoc
like this

Sonicks

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 24, 2005
Messages
1,401
This guy Darbian, holds the record for speed run on Super Mario Bros (so his channel says).

He made a video that explained all the details about the mechanics of Super Mario Bros. It was amazing to watch. You would think a game like Super Mario Bros is simple, but he makes it complex. I'm impressed by the deep learning of just normal humans sometimes.



I'd be much more impressed if someone was capable of learning the game that deeply on their own rather than using Assist tools that basically break the game down by the each frame/code execution line.

I'll never give any fool that uses "Tool Assists" any credit even if they can pull off their feat after the fact without them. The fact that they had to cheat to learn the game's mechanics invalidates any 'achievement' they do afterwards.
 

SvenBent

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 13, 2008
Messages
3,319
I'd be much more impressed if someone was capable of learning the game that deeply on their own rather than using Assist tools that basically break the game down by the each frame/code execution line.

I'll never give any fool that uses "Tool Assists" any credit even if they can pull off their feat after the fact without them. The fact that they had to cheat to learn the game's mechanics invalidates any 'achievement' they do afterwards.

Breaking things into smaller parts and analysing how they works is the basics of scientific progress and normal training/learning... this sounds more like sour grapes especially with the part "even if they can pull off their feat... without them".
With that statement this just sounds like the ussual bad-player-will-always-justify-how-they-are-better/have-more-fun-than-people-that-are-outperforming-them.
 

IcePickFreak

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
1,673
Finally, something worthy of being called "the best thing since sliced bread." I never thought bread was that hard to slice, and I never thought playing a video game was so much of a chore that I needed another computer to play it for me.
 

Sonicks

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 24, 2005
Messages
1,401
Breaking things into smaller parts and analysing how they works is the basics of scientific progress and normal training/learning... this sounds more like sour grapes especially with the part "even if they can pull off their feat... without them".
With that statement this just sounds like the ussual bad-player-will-always-justify-how-they-are-better/have-more-fun-than-people-that-are-outperforming-them.

Nope. It's cheating. It's that simple.

I remember back as a kid playing games over and over and over and learning all of the ins and outs until I got really good and couldn't get better. Getting a computer to tell you the ins and outs is plain cheating. Nothing less.

You're comparison is Apples to Oranges. The scientific method is the application of critical thinking skills to solve or figure something out. Games require skill and skill earned through a computer, that is a computer that tells you the skill, isn't your skill anymore. Just imagine someone telling you how to do a magic trick and then you go out and perform it and parade it around as your own instead of having coming up with it yourself. It's the same thing.
 
Last edited:

Krenum

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 29, 2005
Messages
18,836
62942383.jpg
 

SvenBent

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 13, 2008
Messages
3,319
Nope. It's cheating. It's that simple.

I remember back as a kid playing games over and over and over and learning all of the ins and outs until I got really good and couldn't get better. Getting a computer to tell you the ins and outs is plain cheating. Nothing less.

You're comparison is Apples to Oranges. The scientific method is the application of critical thinking skills to solve or figure something out. Games require skill and skill earned through a computer, that is a computer that tells you the skill, isn't your skill anymore. Just imagine someone telling you how to do a magic trick and then you go out and perform it and parade it around as your own instead of having coming up with it yourself. It's the same thing.

So i assume all your knowledge you have only from yourself... and never learned anything from anyone else? athletic learns they strategy and techniques just on their own... ok
 

Sonicks

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 24, 2005
Messages
1,401
So i assume all your knowledge you have only from yourself... and never learned anything from anyone else? athletic learns they strategy and techniques just on their own... ok

You keep making comparisons that aren't in the same league which tells me you clearly can't see the difference.

But ya know, as with anything, you can never change anyone's made up mind, so....agree to disagree. It's still cheating.
 
Last edited:
Top