AlphaDogfight trials
Discussion
https://twitter.com/darpa/status/12965647457519943...
The AlphaDogfight Trials have concluded! Congratulations to Heron Systems whose AI agent won the championship among the systems competitors and then beat our F-16 pilot in five straight simulated dogfights in the man-vs-machine finale.
https://youtu.be/NzdhIA2S35w
The AlphaDogfight Trials have concluded! Congratulations to Heron Systems whose AI agent won the championship among the systems competitors and then beat our F-16 pilot in five straight simulated dogfights in the man-vs-machine finale.
https://youtu.be/NzdhIA2S35w
Quite a few things to consider in that outcome, here is a good analysis from an ex USAF/Navy pilot;
https://youtu.be/ziCQqmEllZo
https://youtu.be/ziCQqmEllZo
Simpo Two said:
So what's the plan here, take pilots out and put computers in the cockpit?
Humans are the biggest limiting factor in aircraft design and performance so removing them makes absolute sense from a technical standpoint. However AI right now isn't ready to fully take over plus we're mentally just still a little behind when it comes to the idea of trusting AI to make decisions which involve killing (Military) or, in the case of Civilian aircraft, trusting your life alongside hundreds of others to AI.However give it another 75+ years when AI has advanced immeasurable, and human trust in AI has also increased, and I'd be surprised to see Humans still "in charge" of motorised transport be it Planes, Trains or Automobiles outside of very limited edge cases like bikes or for sport.
IanH755 said:
Humans are the biggest limiting factor in aircraft design and performance so removing them makes absolute sense from a technical standpoint. However AI right now isn't ready to fully take over plus we're mentally just still a little behind when it comes to the idea of trusting AI to make decisions which involve killing (Military) or, in the case of Civilian aircraft, trusting your life alongside hundreds of others to AI.
However give it another 75+ years when AI has advanced immeasurable, and human trust in AI has also increased, and I'd be surprised to see Humans still "in charge" of motorised transport be it Planes, Trains or Automobiles outside of very limited edge cases like bikes or for sport.
Sounds like a wretched existence. We may as well write ourselves out of the script altogether.However give it another 75+ years when AI has advanced immeasurable, and human trust in AI has also increased, and I'd be surprised to see Humans still "in charge" of motorised transport be it Planes, Trains or Automobiles outside of very limited edge cases like bikes or for sport.
IanH755 said:
Simpo Two said:
So what's the plan here, take pilots out and put computers in the cockpit?
Humans are the biggest limiting factor in aircraft design and performance so removing them makes absolute sense from a technical standpoint. However AI right now isn't ready to fully take over plus we're mentally just still a little behind when it comes to the idea of trusting AI to make decisions which involve killing (Military) or, in the case of Civilian aircraft, trusting your life alongside hundreds of others to AI.However give it another 75+ years when AI has advanced immeasurable, and human trust in AI has also increased, and I'd be surprised to see Humans still "in charge" of motorised transport be it Planes, Trains or Automobiles outside of very limited edge cases like bikes or for sport.
Yertis said:
IanH755 said:
Humans are the biggest limiting factor in aircraft design and performance so removing them makes absolute sense from a technical standpoint. However AI right now isn't ready to fully take over plus we're mentally just still a little behind when it comes to the idea of trusting AI to make decisions which involve killing (Military) or, in the case of Civilian aircraft, trusting your life alongside hundreds of others to AI.
However give it another 75+ years when AI has advanced immeasurable, and human trust in AI has also increased, and I'd be surprised to see Humans still "in charge" of motorised transport be it Planes, Trains or Automobiles outside of very limited edge cases like bikes or for sport.
Sounds like a wretched existence. We may as well write ourselves out of the script altogether.However give it another 75+ years when AI has advanced immeasurable, and human trust in AI has also increased, and I'd be surprised to see Humans still "in charge" of motorised transport be it Planes, Trains or Automobiles outside of very limited edge cases like bikes or for sport.
The capacity of the human race to keep coming up with ever more reasons to replace human beings never ceases to amaze and perplex me......when we have ever more humans on the planet with less and less to do.
From the video, the AI pilot wins due to superior gun aiming.
It took shots that the human pilot would not attempt.
Makes sense as shooting is 100% physics. This is like the Star Wars laser weapon argument - why would you have a human gunner trying to aim a laser weapon when a computer could aim it moe accurately? Because movie.
I can foresee a time when combat aircraft are unmanned, and controlled by AI, but a pilot on the ground follows the action and can take over to abort, etc if needed.
It took shots that the human pilot would not attempt.
Makes sense as shooting is 100% physics. This is like the Star Wars laser weapon argument - why would you have a human gunner trying to aim a laser weapon when a computer could aim it moe accurately? Because movie.
I can foresee a time when combat aircraft are unmanned, and controlled by AI, but a pilot on the ground follows the action and can take over to abort, etc if needed.
aeropilot said:
Yertis said:
IanH755 said:
Humans are the biggest limiting factor in aircraft design and performance so removing them makes absolute sense from a technical standpoint. However AI right now isn't ready to fully take over plus we're mentally just still a little behind when it comes to the idea of trusting AI to make decisions which involve killing (Military) or, in the case of Civilian aircraft, trusting your life alongside hundreds of others to AI.
However give it another 75+ years when AI has advanced immeasurable, and human trust in AI has also increased, and I'd be surprised to see Humans still "in charge" of motorised transport be it Planes, Trains or Automobiles outside of very limited edge cases like bikes or for sport.
Sounds like a wretched existence. We may as well write ourselves out of the script altogether.However give it another 75+ years when AI has advanced immeasurable, and human trust in AI has also increased, and I'd be surprised to see Humans still "in charge" of motorised transport be it Planes, Trains or Automobiles outside of very limited edge cases like bikes or for sport.
The capacity of the human race to keep coming up with ever more reasons to replace human beings never ceases to amaze and perplex me......when we have ever more humans on the planet with less and less to do.
There's an interview with one of the Heron team where they make it clear that this AI was evolved to win the game, not to fly a fighter.
The game gives it perfect knowledge of it's opponents actions, regardless of distance or relative position - unlike sensors on an aircraft.
The gun rules are simply that you need to get the target in range and in your firing cone - unlike the real world there's no bullet flight, so no need for lead and no gravity.
This game didn't reward self preservation, so the AI didn't evolve any, it's sole goal is to get and keep the target in it's gun cone.
In the other corner we had a human opponent that has no experience of the flight simulator and is trying to use techniques intended for real aircraft. He didn't stand a chance.
Herons AI was probably the simplest one there, but it seemed to be the only one that was designed to win the game. Everyone else, including the pilot, seemed to subconsciously follow the idea that it was intended as a simulation so they should limit their behaviour to ones that applied to the real world.
The game gives it perfect knowledge of it's opponents actions, regardless of distance or relative position - unlike sensors on an aircraft.
The gun rules are simply that you need to get the target in range and in your firing cone - unlike the real world there's no bullet flight, so no need for lead and no gravity.
This game didn't reward self preservation, so the AI didn't evolve any, it's sole goal is to get and keep the target in it's gun cone.
In the other corner we had a human opponent that has no experience of the flight simulator and is trying to use techniques intended for real aircraft. He didn't stand a chance.
Herons AI was probably the simplest one there, but it seemed to be the only one that was designed to win the game. Everyone else, including the pilot, seemed to subconsciously follow the idea that it was intended as a simulation so they should limit their behaviour to ones that applied to the real world.
An interesting article from an F18 pilot about it. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/35947/navy-f...
A few points I noted:
- The AI did several head on shots, something human pilots don't train for as it's bloody dangerous
- Within the simulation the AI had perfect situational awareness
- Where the AI gains massively is on multi tasking, the human pilot has to take attention away from the fight to monitor/fly the aircraft
- The human was in a simulator so didn't have to contend with G-forces which would reduce his performance for real
- While gun only combat isn't what most people think happens in air combat these days, it's a hugely useful tool for a pilot in learning how to fight the aircraft, understanding energy, etc, he reckoned he didn't know anyone who was above average at these exercises but struggled anywhere else.
- Pilots aren't fully in control anyway, the computers already turn his inputs in whatever control surface movements are needed to get the outcome he was after without breaking the aircraft, so he thinks we could initially see this kind of AI being used in piloted aircraft with the pilot giving control to the computer for an engagement
A few points I noted:
- The AI did several head on shots, something human pilots don't train for as it's bloody dangerous
- Within the simulation the AI had perfect situational awareness
- Where the AI gains massively is on multi tasking, the human pilot has to take attention away from the fight to monitor/fly the aircraft
- The human was in a simulator so didn't have to contend with G-forces which would reduce his performance for real
- While gun only combat isn't what most people think happens in air combat these days, it's a hugely useful tool for a pilot in learning how to fight the aircraft, understanding energy, etc, he reckoned he didn't know anyone who was above average at these exercises but struggled anywhere else.
- Pilots aren't fully in control anyway, the computers already turn his inputs in whatever control surface movements are needed to get the outcome he was after without breaking the aircraft, so he thinks we could initially see this kind of AI being used in piloted aircraft with the pilot giving control to the computer for an engagement
RizzoTheRat said:
- The AI did several head on shots, something human pilots don't train for as it's bloody dangerous
So is being shot down! If anything the useful lesson is probably that humans and AI won't fight to the same rules so don't expect to fight a computer in the way you would a person.Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff