Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

This_Objective7808 t1_izcvmmu wrote

I'm curious how the number of messages it sends compares to the human players. 5200 seems like a lot for 2 games. It may be that this is similar to the problem with the SAT essay where just writing a longer essay got you a higher score independent of quality. By being agreeable with all the other players, it may have been able to outlast it's competitors.

Either way, this is a great achievement for nlp. I'm excited for how nlp+rl will be used in the coming years.

7

MetaAI_Official OP t1_izfhy6x wrote

I loved this problem! The average human player sends way too few messages compared to the best human players, so the challenge was how far to push this before it became.... weird. So it wasn't just infinite messaging either. I'll let others answer how that was technically achieved, but this was an underrated challenge to achieving great play. What a great question! -AG

6

MetaAI_Official OP t1_izfi4f8 wrote

CICERO sent/received an average of 292 messages per game (the 5277 is the number of messages it sent over the course of 40 games). This figure was comparable to its human counterparts. As Andrew points out, this was quite an interesting technical problem to tackle — there are real risks to sending too many messages (annoying your allies, + the additional risk of degenerate text spirals), but missing opportunities to collaborate by not sending enough messages can also be devastating. -ED

5