View source for User talk:D414

From Robowiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Contents

Thread titleRepliesLast modified
What's the highest ranking non-learning bot in the rumble?716:34, 26 January 2024

What's the highest ranking non-learning bot in the rumble?

Does anybody know which (non-learning) bot holds the highest ranking in the 1v1 and melee rumbles?

D414 (talk)13:13, 25 January 2024

What is your definition of non-learning? Do you mean perceptual?

IMO as long as you have state, you are in fact “learning”.

Xor (talk)13:35, 25 January 2024

You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reasons:

  • The action you have requested is limited to users in the group: Users.
  • You must confirm your email address before editing pages. Please set and validate your email address through your user preferences.

You can view and copy the source of this page.

Return to Thread:User talk:D414/What's the highest ranking non-learning bot in the rumble?/reply (2).

Well, we can loosen the limit of perceptual to allow information of k recent turns, e.g. k-perceptual. Under this definition, linear targeting will be 1-perceptual, circular targeting being 2-perceptual, and average velocity targeting with window size k will be k-perceptual.

As long as k is large enough, we can still make effective learning methods. So there’s still not an absolute difference between learning and non-learning. Simple enough methods like averaging velocity is still “learning”.

Xor (talk)16:41, 25 January 2024
 

This is pretty much what I had in mind, particularly "similar states give similar decisions". Another distinction I find helpful is the idea that past results should not influence decisions in the future but past states can. A gun that gathers statistics on hit/miss and adjusts its aim is learning but average velocity targeting is not.

D414 (talk)17:45, 25 January 2024

If average velocity (with window size k) is non-learning, how about play it forward using only k recent scans? Both are not changing behavior based on results, only recent scans, plus, play it forward is merely a more precise version of “averageing”.

IMO both are learning using k scans, the only difference is the latter is more precise, and using data more effectively.

Xor (talk)04:00, 26 January 2024

I definitely agree that they're both learning, at least in some sense. The main difference is that the accuracy of a linear targeting system would have diminishing returns as k is increased, whereas a PIF system would likely benefit from increased amounts of data.

It's certainly a difficult question to formalise. I suppose that plotting prediction accuracy vs. k would give some idea of how much learning is going on.

D414 (talk)16:34, 26 January 2024
 
 
 

I think the best in the 'perceptual' / 'stateless' category is RetroGirl

Skilgannon (talk)21:14, 25 January 2024