Computer game bot Turing test: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 20:24, 8 February 2013

Revision as of 20:25, 8 February 2013

Line 42:

* 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.