Technology Review - Published By MIT
Advertisement

A Turing Test for Computer Game Bots

A new contest could help develop better AI for games and other applications.

By David Kushner

Thursday, September 10, 2009

smaller text tool iconmedium text tool iconlarger text tool icon

Can a computer fool expert gamers into believing it's one of them? That was the question posed at the second annual BotPrize, a three-month contest that concluded today at the IEEE Computational Symposium on Intelligence and Games in Milan.

Prize fighter: A screenshot from Unreal Tournament 2004, the computer game used in the BotPrize competition.
Credit: Epic Games
Multimedia
video  Watch a contestant in last year's competition.

The contest challenges programmers to create a software "bot" to control a game character that can pass for human, as judged by a panel of experts. The goal is not only to improve AI in entertainment, but also to fuel advances in non-gaming applications of AI. The BotPrize challenge is a variant of the Turing test, devised by Alan Turing, which challenges a machine to convince a panel of judges that it is a human in a text-only conversation.

"The BotPrize is important for AI in gaming because it aims to show how AI can make games more fun to play, by providing more interesting opponents for game players," says Philip Hingston, associate professor in the School of Computer and Information Science at Edith Cowan University in Perth, Australia, and an overseer of the competition. "It is also important for AI in general because it highlights a central question in AI: How is human intelligence related to computer intelligence?"

This year's BotPrize drew 15 entrants from Japan, the United Kingdom, the United States, Italy, Spain, Brazil, and Canada. Entrants created bots for Unreal Tournament 2004, a first-person shoot-'em-up in which gamers compete against each other for the most virtual kills. For the contest, in-game chatting was disabled so that bots could be evaluated for their so-called "humanness" by "physical" behavior alone. And, to elicit more spontaneity, contestants were given weapons that behaved differently from the ones ordinarily used in the game.

Story continues below


Each expert judge on the prize panel took turns shooting against two unidentified opponents-one human-controlled, the other a bot created by a contestant. After 10 to 15 minutes, the judge tried to identify the AI. To win the big prize, worth $6,000, a bot had to fool at least 80% of the judges. As in last year's competition, however, none of the participants was able to pull off this feat. A minor award worth $1,700, for the most "human-like" bot, was awarded to Jeremy Cathran, from the University of Southern California, for his entry, called sqlitebot.

Artificial intelligence has long been crucial to creating convincing and compelling computer games, whether a player is competing against drivers in Mario Kart on the Nintendo Wii or alien invaders in Halo 3 for the Microsoft's Xbox 360 games console. And, as competition increases in the $21 billion game industry, developers are striving to make game AI even more convincing. But creating a good bot presents a formidable challenge, says Steve Polge, lead programmer of Epic Games, the company that created Unreal Tournament. "You don't always want your AI to perform just like a human," he says. "Humans can be pretty annoying and obnoxious opponents." Instead, Polge says, developers often strive for "AI that can make unexpected plans and present emergent and surprising challenges to the player, which will definitely lead to better games."

Comments

  • Bad Plan
    A new movie just came out and I saw it last night.  It's premise is that a very nice scientist with very good intentions creates AI for a robotic system that creates it's own robots.  The military gets their hands on it and promptly uses it to destroy all living things on the planet.  Similar to the Terminator scenario.  The fools!  The damnable fools! 

    Unrealistic?  Well, the military weaponizing AI robots as we speak, and working on making them completely autonomous.

    Oh well... Life had a good run on this planet while it lasted.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    MATR
    09/10/2009
    Posts:6
    Avg Rating:
    2/5
  • Bad Judging Practices
    Ok, so if I'm understanding this correctly, the bot needed to get 80% of the judges to choose it over 1 other human opponent?  So if the bot looked exactly like a player the judge would in fact have completely guess between the 2, giving a 50% chance to get chosen, a whole 30% less then the number to win.

    A better test would be to have 22 players and the 10 bots, and then have the judges be part of the 22 players.  At the end of a set of games the judges pick 10 names of those they believed were the bots.  Even though this is also not perfect, it is a lot better then an exactly human bot having still a 30% differential from the needed 80% to win

    In it's current incarnation it's a complete bogus competition that means nothing.

    edit:
    sorry, it's a competition where the lack of a winner or being the winner means nothing because the judging is horrible.  I am in full support of AI competitions though!
    Rate this comment: 12345

    Shiladie
    09/11/2009
    Posts:56
    Avg Rating:
    4/5
    • Re: Bad Judging Practices
      In fact the judges were able to nominate both players as human if they wished - that is they were not forced to choose, so your calculation is not correct. In 2008 3 of 5 humans passed the test, in 2009 only one did. In both years, the humans were judged to be much more human than the bots.

      But you do have point. It might be possible to improve the format.
      Rate this comment: 12345

      phi
      09/19/2009
      Posts:1
  • Good competition!
    This is exactly what we need. It should be a 50-50 test environment. As for the military, ya they need some guidelines. It is time for a treaty among nations regarding the use of killer technology. From Daisy Cutters and White Phosphorous (Willy Pete) to autonomous killer robots and missile launch platforms. We need to decide again the rules of war. Or better yet how about no war?
    Rate this comment: 12345

    tlynnch
    09/12/2009
    Posts:5
    Avg Rating:
    2/5
    • Re: Good competition!
      Let's all just decide to not have wars? What a fantastic idea! I can't believe that no one in the last 15,000 years has thought of that!

      Yep, world peace is surely right around the corner now.
      Rate this comment: 12345

      James Felix
      09/13/2009
      Posts:1
      Avg Rating:
      4/5

Log In

Forgot your password?     Register »
Advertisement

Videos

Malleable Maps, Artistic Robots and Bubble Interfaces
Technology Review January/February 2010

Current Issue

Security in the Ether
Information technology's next grand challenge will be to secure the cloud--and prove we can trust it.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Subscribe to Technology Review's daily e-mail update. Enter your e-mail address

TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES
Advertisement
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology © 2010 Technology Review. All Rights Reserved.