Contrasts To The Turing Test
The Computer Game Bot Turing test differs from the traditional or generic Turing test in a number of ways.
- Unlike the traditional Turing Test, for example the Chatterbot-style contest held annually by the Loebner Prize competition, the humans who played against the Computer Game Bots are not actively trying to convince judges they are the human; rather, they want to win the game (i.e., by achieving the highest kill score).
- Judges are not restricted to awarding only one participant in a match as the 'human' and the other as the 'non-human.' This emphasizes more qualitiative rather than polarized findings.
- With regards to a successful computer game bot, this is not be confused with a claim that the bot is 'intelligent,' whereas a machine that 'passed' the Turing Test would arguably have some evidence for its Chatterbot's 'intelligence.'
- The game Unreal Tournament 2004 was chosen for its commercial availability and its interface for creating bots, GameBots. This limitation on medium is a sharp contrast to the Turing Test, which emphasizes a conversation, where possible questions are vastly more numerous than the set of possible actions available in any specific video game.
- The available information to the participants, humans and bots, is not equal. Humans interact through vision and sound, whereas bots interact with data and events.
- The judges cannot introduce new events (e.g., a lava pit) to aid in differentiating between human and bot, whereas in a Chatterbot designed system, judges may theoretically ask any question in any manner.
- The two participants and the judge take part in a three-way interaction, unlike, for example, the paired two-way interaction of the Loebner Prize Contest.
Read more about this topic: Computer Game Bot Turing Test
Famous quotes containing the words contrasts and/or test:
“A tattered copy of Johnson’s large Dictionary was a great delight to me, on account of the specimens of English versifications which I found in the Introduction. I learned them as if they were so many poems. I used to keep this old volume close to my pillow; and I amused myself when I awoke in the morning by reciting its jingling contrasts of iambic and trochaic and dactylic metre, and thinking what a charming occupation it must be to “make up” verses.”
—Lucy Larcom (1824–1893)
“Utopias are presented for our inspection as a critique of the human state. If they are to be treated as anything but trivial exercises of the imagination. I suggest there is a simple test we can apply.... We must forget the whole paraphernalia of social description, demonstration, expostulation, approbation, condemnation. We have to say to ourselves, “How would I myself live in this proposed society? How long would it be before I went stark staring mad?””
—William Golding (b. 1911)