AI Beats Eight World Champions at Bridge (theguardian.com) 20
An artificial intelligence has beaten eight world champions at bridge, a game in which human supremacy has resisted the march of the machines until now. From a report: [...] French startup NukkAI announced the news of its AI's victory on Friday, at the end of a two-day tournament in Paris. The NukkAI challenge required the human champions to play 800 consecutive deals divided into 80 sets of 10. It did not involve the initial bidding component of the game during which players arrive at a contract that they must then meet by playing their cards. Each champion played their own and their "dummy" partner's cards against a pair of opponents. These opponents were the best robot champions in the world to date -- robots that have won many robot competitions but that are universally acknowledged to be nowhere near as good as expert human players.
The AI -- called NooK -- played the same role as the human champion, with the same cards and the same opponents. The score was the difference between those of the human and the AI, averaged over each set. NooK won 67, or 83%, of the 80 sets. Jean-Baptiste Fantun, co-founder of NukkAI, said he had been confident the machine -- which the company has been developing for five years -- would triumph in thousands of deals, but with only 800 it was touch-and-go. Announcing the results, the mathematician Cedric Villani, winner of the Fields medal in 2010, called NukkAI "a superb French success story." AI researcher Veronique Ventos, NukkAI's other co-founder, calls NooK a "new generation AI" because it explains its decisions as it goes along. "In bridge, you can't play if you don't explain," she says.
The AI -- called NooK -- played the same role as the human champion, with the same cards and the same opponents. The score was the difference between those of the human and the AI, averaged over each set. NooK won 67, or 83%, of the 80 sets. Jean-Baptiste Fantun, co-founder of NukkAI, said he had been confident the machine -- which the company has been developing for five years -- would triumph in thousands of deals, but with only 800 it was touch-and-go. Announcing the results, the mathematician Cedric Villani, winner of the Fields medal in 2010, called NukkAI "a superb French success story." AI researcher Veronique Ventos, NukkAI's other co-founder, calls NooK a "new generation AI" because it explains its decisions as it goes along. "In bridge, you can't play if you don't explain," she says.
No bidding (Score:2)
My sentiment exactly (Score:2)
The nuance required in bidding is a tough nut to crack, and precisely what AI advances need to tackle. An AI that could interact with a human partner on bidding would be impressive.
Re: (Score:2)
Or playing against the same players who actually did the bidding...
and
"Each champion played [...] against a pair of opponents. These opponents were the best robot champions in the world to date – robots that have won many robot competitions but that are universally acknowledged to be nowhere near as good as expert human players."
Not Even a Subset (Score:2)
Headline should make it clear that it was a subset of bridge only.
It's not really even a subset since it seems they always played both hands which means that, when defending against a contract they would have far better coordination than is possible in bridge.
One of the key skills in bridge is working out the strengths and weaknesses of your partner's hand from the bidding so that you can win or defeat the contract - in this game you always have perfect knowledge of your partner's hand. Really this is a new game designed so the computer can play it well so is it reall
Re: (Score:2)
"against a pair of opponents. These opponents were the best robot champions in the world to date "
I read this to mean 2 different AIs were the opponents of both the human+dummy & also the Nook AI+dummy playing the same setup of cards and bid contract. I read this to mean the 2 AI opponents had no direct communication, beside seeing what was played.
Re: (Score:2)
They only played as declarer, so the issue of the defence knowing each other's hands didn't arise.
Re: (Score:1)
Exactly, and a human player will always choose what bids they're comfortable with making. A robot would not be as biased playing any bid.
And if the opponents also is robots, did they use the same robot or another bridge-playing software. Because if they used the same opponents as they trained this robot on it would have an unfair advantage.
It's a French startup (Score:2)
They should play Belote instead.
Re: (Score:2)
belote has nothing to do with smart plays. It's about trolling your opponent the harder!
That's one of the thing I miss the most in the US. No one to play coinche with... I get my fix at international conferences!
AI better at beating AI than humans are (Score:1)
So the humans never played against the new AI.
Instead it was Humans vs Old AI and AI vs Old AI.
Turns out that AI which practices millions of times to beat Old AI does well? That's not exactly "Beating Humans at Bridge" though.
Of course, like all games, it's just a matter of time...
Re: (Score:2)
How many still play Bridge? (Score:1)
My father and his brother were bridge players. From what I understand, it was an excellent way to make social contacts because people at various social spots would often need a 'fourth' to play cards and it was an opportunity for a newcomer to get acquainted.
He was going to teach me but somehow it didn't work out, and, I never seemed to find myself in a situation where it would've come in handy to know the game anyway. Sometimes I played hearts or gin rummy, or even cribbage when I was in the Navy, but I
Re: How many still play Bridge? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
It isn't playing with people face to face is it? I suppose this pandemic makes face to face ill-advised anyway. Maybe the pandemic is what's put me in this nostalgic mood.
If I'm going to be sitting at my computer for long periods of time, I'll use it to work on my Blender project.
I do appreciate the offer though, and I hope you find a fourth who'll be a worthy participant.
Re: How many still play Bridge? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> I get the feeling that bridge belongs to a bygone era
That's because it was. Contact Bridge had ~20 millions players in the 1930s and 1940s.
I don't know what happened to Auction Bridge [wikipedia.org] ?
AI Beats Eight World Champions at Bridge (Score:2)
can't play if you don't explain (Score:2)
. "In bridge, you can't play if you don't explain," she says.
While that is true for the bidding part of the game, that's not really the case for the playing bit (unless there was a serious allegation of cheating).
An AI That Doesn't Play Bridge! (Score:2)
"It did not involve the initial bidding component of the game during which players arrive at a contract that they must then meet by playing their cards."
That's the core concept of Bridge, so this is not playing Bridge, it is playing plain Whist (AKA Trumps). Which is a fun game, but not as good as Contract Whist, which is essentially the non-partner forerunner of Bridge (and is much better than the latter game which is only really interesting when played for money).
Perfect Knowledge better for AI! (Score:2)
Oh wow, in a game involving perfect knowledge of the cards, unlike you know, *real bridge* an AI has an advantage. Shocking.
Let me know when an AI partner is better than a real partner, including bidding!