Timeline for How to design AI to understand its selling decisions?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Apr 30, 2015 at 20:28 | comment | added | zardon | I also reading up on the "Monte Carlo Tree Search" which might be another solution | |
Apr 30, 2015 at 20:13 | comment | added | zardon | I'm probably going to lean towards AI has a "persona" as it might make things easier for me | |
Apr 29, 2015 at 7:12 | vote | accept | zardon | ||
Apr 27, 2015 at 14:23 | comment | added | Dan Bryant | Regarding strategical rating, one thing that can help a lot to keep players from 'gaming' the hard-coded AI strategies is to add some randomness. Have the strategies generate probability weights for which actions are likely to be best, but then choose the action randomly so as not to be predictable. This also provides one area where you can add a difficulty adjustment knob (by adding additional probability weight to the moves that are likely mistakes.) That said, some players actually enjoy a more predictable AI, as part of the game can be learning the patterns and how to beat them. | |
Apr 27, 2015 at 12:39 | history | edited | Philipp | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 181 characters in body
|
Apr 27, 2015 at 11:48 | history | edited | Philipp | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 428 characters in body
|
Apr 27, 2015 at 10:54 | history | edited | Philipp | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 188 characters in body
|
Apr 27, 2015 at 10:49 | history | edited | Philipp | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 188 characters in body
|
Apr 27, 2015 at 9:30 | history | edited | Philipp | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 29 characters in body
|
Apr 27, 2015 at 9:20 | history | edited | Philipp | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 29 characters in body
|
Apr 27, 2015 at 9:05 | history | answered | Philipp | CC BY-SA 3.0 |