AI card...

[harl]

I hope this is a joke

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1855163,00.asp
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25893
(it's the inquirer after all)

If true future Pc's may have
GPU: (for 3D gaming and H264 aceleration)
Physx card (for fisics)
X-Fi (for sound efects)
AI card (for game AI)

So the CPU may rest as an adornment?

What's next
X-Office the card for MS-Office :p

[|MaguS|]

I don't think this will take off, AI is not as CPU stressful as Physics. Actually its pretty low on the CPU scale if coded properly.

[Graphicmaniac]

so i will protest not buying cpu :D

[russ_3d]

if it was somehow linked to the bones/animation controllers it would be fantastic, with enviromental awareness, and physics.

imagine a guy, who has to get down from a roof. he can jump off (dangerous) or he can go down the stairs (or grab on the railing and jump down) he can look for a drainpipe on the side, grab it and slide down or climb down, depending on the situation, using the physX to create the pressure with his hand bones necessary to slide/climb down. with physX you may have to even turn the real handles to open things.. imagine the stunts an AI could do with a repetoire of gymnastic moves - wall jumping, mid air dodging etc :eek:

imagine the hunter monster AI in farcry with this baby, when in the jungle.. we would be meat lol.

[nutball]

I don't think this will take off, AI is not as CPU stressful as Physics. Actually its pretty low on the CPU scale if coded properly.

Hmmm. Well AI in all current games sucks, big-style. Are you sure the problem isn't that AI is too difficult to do properly within current FLOP budgets, so it doesn't get done properly at all, just hacked up to fit within available resources?

[|MaguS|]

Im sure, AI sucks in many games because they are just poorly coded routines. Look at FEAR and how well its AI is, or even Call of Duty, Sure COD doesn't have the best but its dam good for what it needs to do. Even MGS Series has great AI for what its suppose to do, Get seen and they will hunt for you using all their abilities untill the timer runs out... sure they don't remember you but the game was coded so that they dont.

AI is mainly limited to the coders, if they can code good AI routines then you can have fantastic AI or they can code quick basic "hide behind a crate" or "run when in danger" routines and call it a day.

EDIT:
A seperate Hardware will only be needed when AI becomes self aware and has the ability to learn on its own (basically TRUE AI), right now all "AI" is nothing more then scripted actions based on situations.

[simdietrich]

I think the biggest issue preventing better AI is spatial and physical reasoning. As a game developer myself, who's actually working on the AI for his game during the last few weeks, I can tell you it is very complicated to 'analyze' the map just to figure out where to walk. Add jumping, climbing, crawling, etc. and it becomes very tempting to just script things, or to let the level designer mark up everything with hints.

Doing a hierarchical goal-based architecture for deciding what to do is not too hard, but even making the AI realize when what it's doing isn't working can be a challenge.

I think specialized hw could help for some low-level tasks, but AI spatial and physical reasoning has too much overlap with graphics and physics to justify another card.

[|MaguS|]

Spatial and Physical reasoning can be achieved with a combination of waypoints and points of interest. You can have points on the map where the AI would know to activate a certain function or script when the situation is needed. This is what FEAR does, The AI will trigger an scripted sequence if they are near a point of interest and if the situation fits the script for the AI Routine. Basically the character would "look" where the player is and where it is on the map and look for the closest POI then run that script. A coder could create many of these and have different statement situations to help the NPC choose which script is more suited for the given situation.

The reason many developers don't do this is it "could" create some overheard and it takes alot of time and testing which many BIG Developers (like EA) don't want. They want a game done as quick as possible and out the door...

[nutball]

Spatial and Physical reasoning can be achieved with a combination of waypoints and points of interest. You can have points on the map where the AI would know to activate a certain function or script when the situation is needed. This is what FEAR does, The AI will trigger an scripted sequence if they are near a point of interest and if the situation fits the script for the AI Routine. Basically the character would "look" where the player is and where it is on the map and look for the closest POI then run that script. A coder could create many of these and have different statement situations to help the NPC choose which script is more suited for the given situation.

That's not AI IMO. Scripted responses are not AI, they're ... I dunno what to call them ... simulated intelligence? Apparent intelligence? Cheating??!!! They're not artificial intelligence.

[|MaguS|]

There is NO real AI, Its currently IMPOSSIBLE! Not even Deep Blue who beat Kasparov in Chess has real AI. Its nothing more then Scripted responses based on situation and possibilities.

Real AI would be something like Skynet or SHODAN in System Shock 2.... If you believe this is remotly possible then your an idiot.

[nutball]

Real AI would be something like Skynet or SHODAN in System Shock 2.... If you believe this is remotly possible then your an idiot.

Gee, thanks. Perhaps I should have posted the second half of my response where I was going to say that true AI is very hard to design, program and is computationally very intensive. I dunno why I trim my responses sometimes :rolleyes:

As far as I'm aware neither Skynet nor SHODAN (whatever that was) acutally existed, I believe they're fictional, right? Hardly a scientific argument assessment of the difficulty or otherwise of implementing AI.

So, tell me, is AI a) easy and doesn't require much CPU, or b) very hard and requires a lot of CPU?

[Nv40]

I liked ROme Total WAr AI. but is not perfect either. MAssive RTS games should benefit greatly technology like this.

[Subtestube]

So, tell me, is AI a) easy and doesn't require much CPU, or b) very hard and requires a lot of CPU?

I've studied AI in three different ways: Distributed, Neural Networks, and Logic Based Symbolic AI, so I have a pretty good grounding in the field. The simple answer to your question is that "Good AI" (i.e., AI that responds properly through non-scripted responses given a rich environment) is FAR TOO HARD. An AI card won't fix this - it would have to be massively programmable, (like a CPU), or it would only deal with maybe 1 or 2 ways of solving the "AI" problem. It's my opinion that a second CPU would serve much better than a dedicated card for AI. There's huge division within the research field as to the right way to go about it, but in terms of gaming it's even harder, as everything has to be done 'just in time', and remain fun. Always remember - in terms of games, believable AI is more fun than more correct AI.

As to Deep Blue - saying it had 'scripted responses' is a little misleading. Deep Blue (as far as I know) was based on a massive search tree with a VERY good heuristic that could alter itself over time (i.e. - it could, and did, learn to be better -> No person programmed its responses, it 'watched' a lot of famous games to learn what a good heuristic would be). Even if you think that Symbolic Logic is the wrong way to go about AI (and I do), Deep Blue was a PROPER AI system in the sense of AI research. Bear in mind though, Deep Blue had all the CPU time it wanted in addition to the fact that it had lengthy turns. In a game, any AI system (and in all likelihood there'll be more than one such system) has to complete it's reasoning at least 60 times a second without cheating other engine functions of the time they need. That's why scripting is so popular - it's very cheap in terms of CPU time, and it can give excellent results if done right.

[gram_vaz]

as if we didn't have enough stuff to confuse n00bs about pc gaming... 'grr, why is hl2 running like crap on my intel EXTREME graphics onboard?' 'why is that cpu a 2800+ even though it's not 2.8ghz?'

[russ_3d]

just think of the possibilities though - what if it was somehow linked to language - and in a rpg a guy could see you and say "hey i know you - your that guy that helped me when i was (randomly) mugged by those bad guys)

or "hey i know you - your that guy who didnt help when i was (randomly) hungry and tired and you had a place to stay"

or "hey i know you - your that guy who was making me feel sad by casting <insert annoyance spell+2> on me when i was younger

or "hey i know you - oh hang on no i dont"

something like oblivion with its radiant A.I would surely benefit from this new tech - it has a massive persistent world were things are happening all the time.


about another cpu/dual core sufficing (sp?) - will these other cores be used for A.I only? what else does a dual core help with?

i would like to see a dedicated A.I processor so that all games can benefit from this - and not have A.I left in the dark because of the 2nd core being used for something else.. why have a gpu when the cpu could do it? wasnt that mentioned a couple of years back?

[Subtestube]

The problem with the AI problem is that it's very very very general. If you had a dedicated AI processor, it would still just be a standard processor, unless you made it solve only one way of doing it. For instance, you could make a very good processor for group AI that did 'multiple pipeline' calculations - flocking for instance is very very simple, but requires that every unit do lots of calculations. The problem is though, that's totally different to knowledge base tree searching - which would help with something like Oblivion. Also, as a note, there's no way in hell the Radiant AI engine will actually be calculating what all agents in it are doing all the time. It'll only focus on the relevant ones, and have some way of calculating what would have likely happened to the indirectly relevant ones when you come across them, if you see what I mean. The reason that GPUs have been as effective as they are, is that they picked one way to do graphics (Raster based z-buffer), and made that very very fast. Raytracing was, at least back then, simply not an option, even in hardware, and so that 'one right way' got ingrained. With AI there's no simple 'right way'. With Physics at least, there are some general conventions, and all the kinds of arithmetic you're doing will pretty much always be the same. Again, with AI, the diversity is just immense.

You could certainly easily make a... say, tree search card that kept and on card knowledge base and allowed for agents to search what they should and shouldn't know outside of the CPU, but I just think the returns from such a thing would be minimal at best, and that it would probably be slower than 'a core'. Bear in mind, parallelism won't stop with 2 cores on 1 die. I'd expect that by 2008 we'll be seeing quad core CPUs, and at that point you face diminishing returns on things like sound/engine mechanics. In terms of games, where do you think that additional power will go? "Smarter" AI is my bet.

EDIT: Oh, and as to language - spoken stuff will be scripted for a very long time yet - even statistical sentence construction is still pretty damn poor. I hope you aren't implying that a hardware "AI" card could solve the 'natural language' problem. Admittedly construction is MUCH easier than comprehension, but it's still way way way hard.

[Kojiro]

Magus is wise beyond his years. There is no true AI. It all abunch of predetermined actions that happen as a result of posibility.

There is a condition, and there is an action. Cause and Effect.

While health is low = go for health power ups / use medikit/ run for cover.

Each effect has it's own = cause and effect. While runing for cover = straif to a fro/Jump doge/go behind object. These effect will also have cause and effects as well.

Untill statements.

Sneak behind untill spotted. This is where programers can cheat on AI, since they can use your feild of vision as part of the parameters of the sneak behind function. Basicaly all they have to do is keep the AI controlled players from going in your FOV and get you from the rear. And as part of calling the Sneak behind function. You can use it as a trigger to call a Gang Up Function to swarm players with near by AI controlled units.

If statements. Can be use you call different functions depending on situations.

these are just an overly simlified display of what game "AI" realy is. True AI, would be where the computer can actualy think for it's self. No matter how great a game "AI" is, It is not true AI.

Purpose of a game "AI" chip= Another way for you to part with your hard earned cash.

[Red_Shift]

just think of the possibilities though - what if it was somehow linked to language - and in a rpg a guy could see you and say "hey i know you - your that guy that helped me when i was (randomly) mugged by those bad guys)

or "hey i know you - your that guy who didnt help when i was (randomly) hungry and tired and you had a place to stay"

or "hey i know you - your that guy who was making me feel sad by casting <insert annoyance spell+2> on me when i was younger

or "hey i know you - oh hang on no i dont"
Isn't this scripted AI?? It seems to me this is only if conditions.



"There is no true AI. There is true AI." ????
We're clearly talking about one of the most complex subjects on Universe.
Maybe there's no true AI and maybe there's no true NI (natural intelligence), maybe we humans too are just a system of Cause/Effect, our system is so complex that it disguises the basic fundamentals of our "Intelligence". And eventually this is what true intelligence is, what is the definition of true intelligence after all? And maybe I'm just plain crazy. :screwy:
This issue was explored on Matrix Reloaded if you remember, for me it was one of the most if not the most interesting parts of the entire trilogy.

[Toss3]

Isn't this scripted AI?? It seems to me this is only if conditions.



"There is no true AI. There is true AI." ????
We're clearly talking about one of the most complex subjects on Universe.
Maybe there's no true AI and maybe there's no true NI (natural intelligence), maybe we humans too are just a system of Cause/Effect, our system is so complex that it disguises the basic fundamentals of our "Intelligence". And eventually this is what true intelligence is, what is the definition of true intelligence after all? And maybe I'm just plain crazy. :screwy:
This issue was explored on Matrix Reloaded if you remember, for me it was one of the most if not the most interesting parts of the entire trilogy.
Umm that's why it is called A.I, artificial intelligence! I mean eveything you do will effect people around you and they'll react in certain ways, maybe the same way if the situation came up many times. So you could say that everything is scripted! When a bomb explodes we don't think, we act! And people who don't, get killed... So why would it be any different in games, where some bad guys are chasing after you with their guns and stuff? Their adrenaline levels would be very high so their reactions would also be very limited; they wouldn't think before reacting!
Btw. there is a way to simulate real AI, that's called multiplayer guys! :D A game only played on the net with bad guys being real people and the same way around, that would come close now wouldn't it? And what about Battlefield2 for ex.? People who are much better than you certaintly have an advantage and you often get killed by them; they are more tactical and they shoot better... So how would a game look if it had real intelligence: You wouldn't survive the first level before you would get killed! It's wouldn't be like playing against n00bs, they would probably all be specially trained and stuff...
Which brings me to my point: Scripted A.I in games is necessary for a game to be fun(and not very hard), they could just make more scripts and better solutions that's all! No real A.I would be needed... and now I'm very tired(which you probably noticed when you read my post) and going to take a nap :D..

[killahsin]

Um guys all ai is scripted. Everything you see in a game is 'scripted' From the pixels to the physics to the shadows, lol. You guys have the craziest debates sometimes. Even a learning AI you see at MIT these days is based on scripted simulations to teach it how to learn based on proper rulesets.

People tend to overuse the word scripted sequence. While not really understanding what they are talking about. Cutscenes in for instance halo 2 are "scripted sequences". Older games like doom 1/2 quake 1/2 and games of the age the ai for enemies did the same thing everytime. Because the ai was somewhat styled after "scripted sequences" you see in cutscense now a days. There is quite a difference between an ai script and a scripted sequence. For instance in a game where one would toss a grenade threw a window and the enemies would "work the window" or say grab a desk and put it against the window rather then all just running out the door every single time, no matter what your point of attack was. A scripted sequence is whats used for most "boss" monsters in alot of games, so you can figure them out and kill them. Roll roll roll slice etc etc. All AI code is 'scripted' but not a unilateral scripted sequence. More rather scripted options.

To the original poster, no its not a joke, and no cpus arent going bye bye either. These technologies are needed for bridging the gap between pixar and id.

[Subtestube]

Um guys all ai is scripted....
....All AI code is 'scripted' but not a unilateral scripted sequence. More rather scripted options.


I'm assuming you mean in terms of games yes? Because in terms of actual AI research, this simply isn't true. I've personally worked with Neural Networks, Distributed AI Crowd Stuff (Basically "Boids", but Distributed AI sounds better), and Subsumption Architecture stuff. The Distributed AI is basically scripted (see this->do this) on a per agent basis, but because all agents re-evaluate direction vectors per-update, it's not scripted in that sense - you never do a more than one 'frame' worth of a script unless you're building complex sequences, and there are ways around that too (recurrent networks etc...).

As I say - if you're talking about games, then yes - quite right. It's all scripted, and will be for quite some time. I still don't see how, when using even relatively simple scripted AI, you can possibly justify an AI card unless you're planning on dealing with huge numbers of agents - something most games simply don't need to do (Obviously Real Time Strats are the exception, and potentially 'war' simulations). Another core with proper unit/group level threading should be more than adequate.

[ToxicTaZ]

Hay sup

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1855163,00.asp

It said:
If the AIS-1 makes it to market, the chip could provide yet another method for Intel and PC OEMs to differentiate entertainment PCs from their more practical business-oriented brethren. It's possible, Mendelson speculated, that the AIS-1 and the PhysX physics chip could be added onto an add-on card "to create a true gaming PC,"

I think this is true! the 3DFX VooDoo days are back :rolleyes: but for how much? $$$ and how long? a year or two maybe? Till some big corporation like Nvidia buys them out like 3DFX they did! then they could use the tech in there next gen GPU like G90?

AiSeek is a fabless semiconductor company developing the next generation of artificial intelligence hardware to power future PC and video games.

http://www.aiseek.com/index.htm

AGEIA™ Technologies Inc. is dedicated to delivering dynamic interactive realism to the ever demanding complexity of next generation games. Its flagship solution, AGEIA PhysX™, is the world's first dedicated physics engine and physics processor to bridge the gap between static virtual worlds and responsive unscripted physical reality. AGEIA PhysX allows developers to use active physics-based environments for a truly realistic entertainment experience.

http://www.ageia.com/

[Mr_LoL]

Toxic that blue and red you are using is hard on the eyes. :crosseye:

[ToxicTaZ]

sorry