The Current State of Human-Level Artificial Intelligence in Computer Simulations and Wargames

Do We Really Want Computer Generated Forces That Learn? Petty (2001)

Type of Research: Academic.

Summary:
The main thesis is that we (not surprisingly) do not want CGF that learn (at least most of the time). The argument can be summed up by the chart (below) that shows the positives (+) and minuses (-) for learning behavior in each category of CGF use.

CGF behavior category	CGF applications
CGF behavior category	Training	Analysis	Experimentation
Unchanged	0	0	0
Improved	+ Improved behavior + Varying experience - Loss of training control - Cost of learning phase	+ Improved behavior - Loss of repeatability - Confounded results - Cost of learning phase	+ Improved behavior + Richer experiment - Confounded results - Cost of learning phase
Altered	+ Varying experience - Loss of training control - Non-doctrinal behavior	- Loss of repeatability - Confounded results - Non-doctrinal behavior	+ Richer experiment - Confounded results - Non-doctrinal behavior
Martian	+ Varying experience - Loss of training control - Unrealistic behavior	- Loss of repeatability - Confounded results - Unrealistic behavior	+ Richer experiment - Confounded results - Unrealistic behavior

I would argue that there are some important categories that are omitted from the above chart such as “Learning Something New”, “Looking Outside the Box” and “Reevaluating Standard Military Doctrine”.

Back

Index