Predicting Dominance Rankings for Score-Based Games

Spyridon Samothrakis, Diego Perez Liebana, S. Lucas, Philipp Rohlfshagen
{"title":"Predicting Dominance Rankings for Score-Based Games","authors":"Spyridon Samothrakis, Diego Perez Liebana, S. Lucas, Philipp Rohlfshagen","doi":"10.1109/TCIAIG.2014.2346242","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Game competitions may involve different player roles and be score-based rather than win/loss based. This raises the issue of how best to draw opponents for matches in ongoing competitions, and how best to rank the players in each role. An example is the Ms Pac-Man versus Ghosts Competition which requires competitors to develop software controllers to take charge of the game's protagonists: participants may develop software controllers for either or both Ms Pac-Man and the team of four ghosts. In this paper, we compare two ranking schemes for win-loss games, Bayes Elo and Glicko. We convert the game into one of win-loss (“dominance”) by matching controllers of identical type against the same opponent in a series of pair-wise comparisons. This implicitly creates a “solution concept” as to what a constitutes a good player. We analyze how many games are needed under two popular ranking algorithms, Glicko and Bayes Elo, before one can infer the strength of the players, according to our proposed solution concept, without performing an exhaustive evaluation. We show that Glicko should be the method of choice for online score-based game competitions.","PeriodicalId":49192,"journal":{"name":"IEEE Transactions on Computational Intelligence and AI in Games","volume":"8 1","pages":"1-12"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1109/TCIAIG.2014.2346242","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IEEE Transactions on Computational Intelligence and AI in Games","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/TCIAIG.2014.2346242","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Computer Science","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

Game competitions may involve different player roles and be score-based rather than win/loss based. This raises the issue of how best to draw opponents for matches in ongoing competitions, and how best to rank the players in each role. An example is the Ms Pac-Man versus Ghosts Competition which requires competitors to develop software controllers to take charge of the game's protagonists: participants may develop software controllers for either or both Ms Pac-Man and the team of four ghosts. In this paper, we compare two ranking schemes for win-loss games, Bayes Elo and Glicko. We convert the game into one of win-loss (“dominance”) by matching controllers of identical type against the same opponent in a series of pair-wise comparisons. This implicitly creates a “solution concept” as to what a constitutes a good player. We analyze how many games are needed under two popular ranking algorithms, Glicko and Bayes Elo, before one can infer the strength of the players, according to our proposed solution concept, without performing an exhaustive evaluation. We show that Glicko should be the method of choice for online score-based game competitions.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
预测基于分数的游戏的优势排名
游戏竞争可能涉及不同的玩家角色,基于分数而非输赢。这就引出了如何在正在进行的比赛中最好地吸引对手,以及如何在每个角色中最好地对玩家进行排名的问题。例如,《吃豆人小姐与幽灵竞赛》要求参赛者开发软件控制器来控制游戏主角:参与者可以为吃豆人小姐和四个幽灵组成的团队开发软件控制器。在本文中,我们比较了两种输赢博弈的排名方案,Bayes Elo和Glicko。我们通过在一系列成对比较中匹配相同类型的控制器来对抗相同的对手,从而将游戏转化为一种输赢(“支配”)。这就隐含地创造了一个“解决方案概念”,即如何构成优秀玩家。我们分析了两种流行的排名算法(Glicko和Bayes Elo)下需要多少场比赛,然后根据我们提出的解决方案概念推断出玩家的实力,而无需执行详尽的评估。我们认为Glicko应该成为基于分数的在线游戏竞赛的首选方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
IEEE Transactions on Computational Intelligence and AI in Games
IEEE Transactions on Computational Intelligence and AI in Games COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE-COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Cessation. The IEEE Transactions on Computational Intelligence and AI in Games (T-CIAIG) publishes archival journal quality original papers in computational intelligence and related areas in artificial intelligence applied to games, including but not limited to videogames, mathematical games, human–computer interactions in games, and games involving physical objects. Emphasis is placed on the use of these methods to improve performance in and understanding of the dynamics of games, as well as gaining insight into the properties of the methods as applied to games. It also includes using games as a platform for building intelligent embedded agents for the real world. Papers connecting games to all areas of computational intelligence and traditional AI are considered.
期刊最新文献
A User Trust System for Online Games—Part II: A Subjective Logic Approach for Trust Inference Accelerating Board Games Through Hardware/Software Codesign Creating AI Characters for Fighting Games Using Genetic Programming Multiagent Path Finding With Persistence Conflicts Changing Resources Available to Game Playing Agents: Another Relevant Design Factor in Agent Experiments
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1