hi all thx for all the great chats. great to see this & some other SE chat rooms livening up recently. inspired to come up with some ideas from 3yr experience/ participation in misc SE chat rooms. suggestions/ feedback welcome — cool chatting session tips / stackexchange profile tips
deep NNs can now "score" games better than humans. there is some application of them to diverse games eg chess. in fact (well concealed trivia here) it appears a chess reinforcement learning program may have been the precursor to alphago.
Ok, so it is one way to go, I was rather looking for some game where calculating who is winning is doable from the current board state, so program wouldn't be too involving and people playing would show what they are doing
@vzn I meant to know who is winning, but we do not have perfect strategy for chess yet, so counting pieces and giving weights is far too bad. No aftermatch for chess game - too long experiment, I am looking for easier game.
@vzn I do not do in classroom anything connected with private research, nothing even slightly helpful for me, they have to learn certain topics, I do different things outside, those things do not collide.
@EvilJS huh? just go back and read your own words sometimes & see if they all make sense...?
hey so how big is your class anyway? why did you say the teacher was unavailable, what happened there?
@EvilJS are you saying chess (even without software involved) requires too much mental exertion by subjects for your experiments? anyway even halfway decent chess code can generate moves quickly, so it would only be somewhat amateur or poorly written code that takes too long to evaluate positions...
@vzn about 30 students, he had car accident, alive, recovering, will be fine.
@vzn I mean that showing stimuli is involving, time consuming. No, poorly written ai player is fast and works good enough. Better player is not that much slower, the main problem is showing results and that tweaking difficulty level is hard - increase in lookahead, some constants, preference of one ply (like knight) over another (like rook) is not easy to manipulate difficulty - for human to give him involving enough game, but not that hard enough, so he could win.
If you change 12 levels depth to 13 levels, this is not exactly linear increase in difficulty, also some moves may be expected by human player for different reasons than his lookahead. So I cannot even guarantee that separate games for the same player are at the same level, so the results are tainted.