REVIEW 3 cited by
The Hanabi Challenge: A New Frontier for AI Research
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
From the early days of computing, games have been important testbeds for studying how well machines can do sophisticated decision making. In recent years, machine learning has made dramatic advances with artificial agents reaching superhuman performance in challenge domains like Go, Atari, and some variants of poker. As with their predecessors of chess, checkers, and backgammon, these game domains have driven research by providing sophisticated yet well-defined challenges for artificial intelligence practitioners. We continue this tradition by proposing the game of Hanabi as a new challenge domain with novel problems that arise from its combination of purely cooperative gameplay with two to five players and imperfect information. In particular, we argue that Hanabi elevates reasoning about the beliefs and intentions of other agents to the foreground. We believe developing novel techniques for such theory of mind reasoning will not only be crucial for success in Hanabi, but also in broader collaborative efforts, especially those with human partners. To facilitate future research, we introduce the open-source Hanabi Learning Environment, propose an experimental framework for the research community to evaluate algorithmic advances, and assess the performance of current state-of-the-art techniques.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Assistax: A Multi-Agent Hardware-Accelerated Reinforcement Learning Benchmark for Assistive Robotics
Assistax provides fast JAX-based assistive robotics environments with trainable humanoid partners, and shows current RL baselines have a coordination gap when facing unseen human preferences.
-
How Much Can a Few Engine Moves Help? Quantifying Limited Cheating in Chess
In engine-vs-engine chess, one or two well-timed engine moves raise the expected score from about 0.51 to roughly 0.66–0.82, depending on the policy.
-
Multi-Agent Language Models: Advancing Cooperation, Coordination, and Adaptation
A thesis proposal repurposing two prior papers on LM agents for text games, framed as a path to theory-of-mind AI, with no new theory-of-mind evidence.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.