[HN Gopher] Project Sid: Many-agent simulations toward AI civili...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Project Sid: Many-agent simulations toward AI civilization
        
       Author : talms
       Score  : 155 points
       Date   : 2024-11-03 19:09 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (github.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
        
       | jlaneve wrote:
       | Here's their blog post announcement too:
       | https://digitalhumanity.substack.com/p/project-sid-many-agen...
        
       | isoprophlex wrote:
       | Now these seem to be truly artificially intelligent agents.
       | Memory, volition, autonomy, something like an OODA loop or
       | whatever you want to call it, and a persistent environment. Very
       | nice concept, and I'm positive the learnings can be applied to
       | more mundane business problems, too.
       | 
       | If only I could get management to understand that a bunch of
       | prompts shitting into eachother isn't "cutting-edge agentic
       | AI"...
       | 
       | But then again _their_ jobs probably depend on selling something
       | that looks like real innovation happening to the C-levels...
        
         | Carrok wrote:
         | > If only I could get management to understand that a bunch of
         | prompts shitting into eachother isn't "cutting-edge agentic
         | AI"...
         | 
         | It's unclear to me how the linked project is different from
         | what you described.
         | 
         | Plenty of existing agents have "memory" and many other things
         | you named.
        
         | jsemrau wrote:
         | >If only I could get management to understand that a bunch of
         | prompts shitting into eachother isn't "cutting-edge agentic
         | AI"...
         | 
         | It should never be this way. Even with narrow AI, there needs
         | to be a governance framework that helps measure the output and
         | capture potential risks (hallucinations, wrong data / links,
         | wrong summaries, etc)
        
       | echelon wrote:
       | All of their domains and branding are .aL
       | 
       | I had no idea .aL was even a domain name. That's wild. I wonder
       | how many of those are going to take off.
        
         | semanticc wrote:
         | .al is just the TLD for Albania, similarly as .ai is for
         | Anguilla. No idea why anyone would choose the former.
        
       | aithrowawaycomm wrote:
       | Reading the paper, this seems like putting the cart before the
       | horse: the agents individually are not actually capable of
       | playing Minecraft and cannot successfully perform the tasks
       | they've assigned or volunteered for, so in some sense the authors
       | are having dogs wear human clothes and declaring it's a human-
       | like civilization. Further, crucial things are essentially hard-
       | coded: what types of societies are available and (I believe) the
       | names of the roles. I am not exactly sure what the social
       | organization is supposed to imply: the strongest claim you could
       | make is that the agent framework could work for video game NPCs
       | because the agents stick to their roles and factions. The claim
       | that agents "can use legal structures" strikes me as especially
       | specious, since "use the legal structure" is hard-wired into the
       | various agents' behavior. Trying to extend all this to actual
       | human society seems ridiculous, and it does not help that the
       | authors blithely ignore sociology and anthropology.
       | 
       | There are some other highly specious claims:
       | 
       | - I said "I believe" the names of the roles are hard-coded, but
       | unless I missed something the information is unacceptably vague.
       | I don't see anything in the agent prompts that would make them
       | create new roles, or assign themselves to roles at all. Again I
       | might be missing something, but the more I read the more confused
       | I get.
       | 
       | - claiming that the agents formed long-term social relationships
       | over the course of 12 Minecraft days, but that's only four real
       | hours and the agents experience real time: the length of a
       | Minecraft day is immaterial! I think "form long-term social
       | relationships" and "use legal structures" aren't merely immodest,
       | they're dishonest.
       | 
       | - the meme / religious transmission stuff totally ignores
       | training data contamination with GPT-4. The summarized meme
       | clearly indicates awareness of the real-world Pastafarian meme,
       | so it is simply wrong to conclude that this meme is being
       | "transmitted," when it is far more likely that it was _evoked_ in
       | an agent that already knew the meme. Why not run this experiment
       | with a truly novel fake religion? Some of the meme examples do
       | seem novel, like  "oak log crafting syndrome," but others like
       | "meditation circle" or "vintage fashion and retro projects" have
       | nothing to do with Minecraft and are almost certainly GPT-4
       | hallucinations.
       | 
       | In general using GPT-4 for this seems like a terrible mistake (if
       | you are interested in doing honest research).
        
         | jsemrau wrote:
         | You are on the right track in my opinion. The key is to encode
         | the interface between the game and the agent so that the agent
         | can make a straightforward choice. For example, by giving the
         | agent the state of a nxn board as the world model, and then a
         | finite set of choices, an agent is capable of playing the game
         | robustly and explaining the decision to the game master. This
         | gives the illusion that the agent reasons. I guess my point is
         | that it's an encoding problem of the world model to break it
         | down into a simple choice.
         | 
         | [1] https://jdsemrau.substack.com/p/evaluating-consciousness-
         | and...
        
       | airstrike wrote:
       | I've thought about this a lot. I'm no philosopher or AI
       | researcher, so I'm just spitballing... but if I were to try my
       | hand at it, I think I'd like to start from "principles" and let
       | systems evolve or at least be discoverable over time
       | 
       | Principles would be things like self-preservation, food, shelter
       | and procreating, communication and memory through a risk-reward
       | calculation prism. Maybe establishing what is "known" vs what is
       | "unknown" is a key component here too, but not in such a binary
       | way.
       | 
       | "Memory" can mean many things, but if you codify it as a function
       | of some type of subject performing some type of action leading to
       | some outcome with some ascribed "risk-reward" profile compared to
       | the value obtained from empirical testing that spans from very
       | negative to very positive, it seems both wide encompassing and
       | generally useful, both to the individual and to the collective.
       | 
       | From there you derive the need to connect with others, disputes
       | over resources, the need to take risks, explore the unknown,
       | share what we've learned, refine risk-rewards, etc. You can guide
       | the civilization to discover certain technologies or inventions
       | or locations we've defined ex ante as their godlike DM which is a
       | bit like cheating because it puts their development "on rails"
       | but also makes it more useful, interesting and relatable.
       | 
       | It sounds computationally prohibitive, but the game doesn't need
       | to play out in real time anyway...
       | 
       | I just think that you can describe _a lot_ of the human condition
       | in terms of  "life", "liberty", "love/connection" and "greed".
       | 
       | Looking at the video in the repo, I don't like how this throws
       | "cultures", "memes" and "religion" into the mix instead of
       | letting them be an emergence from the need to communicate and
       | share the belief systems that emerge from our collective
       | memories. Because it seems like a distinction without a
       | difference for the purposes of analyzing this. Also "taxes are
       | high!" without the underlying "I don't have enough resources to
       | get by" seems too much like a mechanical turk
        
         | grugagag wrote:
         | Many of these projects are inch deep into intelligence and
         | miles deep into the current technology. Some things will see
         | tremendous benefits but as far as artificial intelligence we're
         | not there yet. Im thinking gaming will benefit a lot from
         | these..
        
           | farias0 wrote:
           | You mean we're not there in simulating an actual human brain?
           | Sure. But we're seeing AI work like a human well enough to be
           | useful, isn't that the point?
        
         | jsemrau wrote:
         | Memory is really interesting. For example, if you play 100,000
         | rounds of 5x5 Tic Tac Toe. Do you really need to remember game
         | 51247 or do you recognize and remember a winning pattern? In
         | Reinforcement Learning you would based on each win revise the
         | policy. How would that work for genAI?
        
       | Tiberium wrote:
       | Honestly I'm really excited about this. I've always dreamed of
       | full blown sandbox games with extremely advanced NPCs (which the
       | current LLMs can already kinda emulate), but on the bigger scale.
       | In just a few decades this will finally be made into proper
       | games. I can't wait.
        
         | aleph_minus_one wrote:
         | > Honestly I'm really excited about this. I've always dreamed
         | of full blown sandbox games with extremely advanced NPCs (which
         | the current LLMs can already kinda emulate), but on the bigger
         | scale.
         | 
         | I don't believe that you want this. Even really good players
         | don't have a chance against super-advanced NPCs (think how
         | chess grandmasters have barely any chance against modern chess
         | programs running on a fast computer). You will rather get
         | crushed.
         | 
         | What you likely want is NPC that "behave more human-like (or
         | animal-like)" - whatever this means.
        
           | Tiberium wrote:
           | Oh, I should've clarified - I don't want to _fight_ against
           | them, I just want to watch and sometimes interfere to see how
           | the agents react ;) A god game like WorldBox /Galimulator, if
           | you will. Or observer mode in tons of games like almost all
           | Paradox ones.
        
             | aleph_minus_one wrote:
             | > I just want to watch and sometimes interfere to see how
             | the agents react ;)
             | 
             | Even there, I am not sure whether if the AI bcomes too
             | advanced, it will be of interest for many players ( _you_
             | might of course nevertheless be interested):
             | 
             | Here, the relevant comparison is to watching (the past)
             | games of AlphaGo against Go grandmasters, where even the
             | highly qualified commentators had insane difficulties
             | explaining AlphaGo's moves because many of the moves were
             | so different from the strategy of any Go game before. The
             | commentors could just accept and grasp that these highly
             | advanced moves _did_ crush the Go grandmaster opponents.
             | 
             | In my opinion, the "typical" sandbox game player wants to
             | watch something that he still can "somewhat" grasp.
        
             | com2kid wrote:
             | I'm working on something similar, https://www.generativesto
             | rytelling.ai/tinyllmtown/index.html a small town where all
             | NPCs are simulated using a small LLM. They react to
             | everything the hero does, which means no more killing a
             | dragon and having no one even mention it.
             | 
             | Once I release it, I'll have it simulate 4 hours every 2
             | hours or so of real time, and visitors can vote on what
             | quest the hero undertakes next.
             | 
             | The simulation is simpler, I am aiming to keep everything
             | to a size that can run on a local GPU with a small model.
             | 
             | Right now you can just watch the NPCs try to figure out
             | love triangles, hide their drinking problems, complain
             | about carrots, and celebrate when the hero saves the town
             | yet again.
        
           | kgeist wrote:
           | >Even really good players don't have a chance against super-
           | advanced NPCs
           | 
           | I guess you can make them dumber by randomly switching to
           | hardcoded behavioral trees (without modern AI) once in a
           | while so that they made mistakes (while feeling pretty
           | intelligent overall), and the player would then have a chance
           | to outsmart them.
        
         | ted_bunny wrote:
         | Game designers have barely scratched the surface of NPC
         | modeling even as it is. Rimworld is considered deep but it's
         | nothing close to it.
        
         | jsemrau wrote:
         | I think it can be quite interesting especially if you consider
         | different character types (in Anthropic lingo this
         | "personality"). The only problem right now is that using a
         | proprietary LLM is incredibly expensive. Therefore having a
         | local LLM might be the best option. Unfortunately, these are
         | still not on the same level as their larger brethren.
         | 
         | [1] https://jdsemrau.substack.com/p/evaluating-consciousness-
         | and...
        
       | aleph_minus_one wrote:
       | The video cannot be played in Mozilla Firefox (Windows); the
       | browser claims that the file is damaged.
        
       | wslh wrote:
       | I cannot open the PDF, is it available somewhere else?
        
       | NoboruWataya wrote:
       | This seems very cool - I am sceptical of the supposed benefits
       | for "civilization" but it could at least make for some very
       | interesting sim games. (So maybe it will be good for Civilization
       | moreso than civilization.)
        
         | caseyy wrote:
         | Indeed sounds better for Civilization than civilization. This
         | could be quite exciting for gaming.
        
           | dmix wrote:
           | GTA6 suddenly needs another 2 years :)
        
         | bbor wrote:
         | Yeah, I was dissapointed (and thrilled, from a p(doom)
         | perspective) to see it implemented in Minecraft instead of
         | Civilization VI, Humankind, or any of the main Paradox grand
         | strategies (namely Stellaris, Victoria, Crusader Kings, and
         | Europa Universalis). To say the least, the stakes are higher
         | and more realistic than "lets plan a feast" "ok, I'll gather
         | some wood!"
         | 
         | To be fair, they might tackle this in the paper -- this is a
         | preprint of a preprint, somehow...
        
       | m0llusk wrote:
       | Interesting context, but highlights all the problems of machine
       | learning models: the lack of reason and abstraction and so on.
       | Hard to say yet how much of an issue this might be, but the
       | medium will almost certainly reveal something about our potential
       | options for social organization.
        
       | zombiwoof wrote:
       | Agentic is an annoying word.
        
       | catlifeonmars wrote:
       | This looks like it is a really cool toy.
       | 
       | It does not strike me as particularly useful from a scientific
       | research perspective. There does not appear to be much thought
       | put into experimental design and really no clear objectives. Is
       | the bar really this low for academic research these days?
        
       | gmuslera wrote:
       | They probably will fall fast into tragedy of the commons kind of
       | situations. We developed most of our civilization while there was
       | enough room for growing and big decisions were centralized, and
       | started to get into bad troubles when things became global
       | enough.
       | 
       | With AIs some of those "protections" may not be there. And
       | hardcoding strategies to avoid this may already put a limit on
       | what we are simulating.
        
         | interstice wrote:
         | Does this mean that individual complexity is a natural enemy of
         | group cohesiveness? Or is individual 'selfishness' more a
         | product of evolutionary background.
         | 
         | On our planet we don't have ant colony dynamics at the physical
         | scale of high intelligence (that I know of), but there are very
         | physical limitations to things like food sources.
         | 
         | Virtual simulations don't have the same limitations, so the
         | priors may be quite different.
        
           | gmuslera wrote:
           | Taking the "best" course of action from your own point of
           | view could not be so good from a more broad perspective. We
           | might have evolved some small group collaboration approaches
           | that in the long run plays better, but in large groups that
           | doesn't go that well. And for AIs trying to optimize
           | something without some big picture vision, things may go
           | wrong faster.
        
       | nachoab wrote:
       | Really interesting but curious how civilization here holds up
       | without deeper human-like complexity, feels like it might lean
       | more toward scripted behaviors than real societies
        
         | userbinator wrote:
         | _feels like it might lean more toward scripted behaviors than
         | real societies_
         | 
         | Guess what's happening with "real societies" now... There's a
         | reason "NPC" is used as an insult.
        
       | luxuryballs wrote:
       | Just yesterday I was wondering how the Midjourney equivalent
       | world gen mod for Minecraft might be coming along. Imagine
       | prompting the terrain gen?? That could be pretty mind blowing.
       | 
       | Describe the trees hills vines, tree colors/patterns, castles,
       | towns, details of all buildings and other features. And have it
       | generate as high quality in Minecraft as image gen can be in
       | stable diffusion?
        
       | caetris2 wrote:
       | I've reviewed the paper and I'm confident this paper was
       | fabricated over a collection of false claims. The claims made are
       | not genuine and should not be taken at face value without peer
       | review. The provided charts and graphics are sophisticated
       | forgeries in many cases when reviewing and vetting their
       | applicability to the claims made.
       | 
       | It is currently not possible for any kind of LLM to do what is
       | being proposed, while maybe the intentions are good with regard
       | to commercial interests, I want to be clear: this paper seems
       | indicate that election-related activities were coordinated by
       | groups of AI agents in a simulation. These kinds of claims
       | require substantial evidence and that was not provided.
       | 
       | The prompts that are provided are not in any way connected to an
       | applied usage of LLMs that are described.
        
       | bitwize wrote:
       | I'm reminded of Dwarf Fortress, which simulates thousands of
       | years of dwarf world time, the changing landscapes and the rise
       | and fall and rise and fall of dwarf kingdoms, then drops seven
       | player-controlled dwarves on the map and tells the player "have
       | fun!" It'd be a useful toy model perhaps for identifying areas of
       | investigation to see if it can predict behavior of real
       | civilizations, but I'm not seeing any AI breakthroughs here.
       | 
       | Maybe when Project Sid 6.7 comes out...
        
       | sweetkimchi wrote:
       | interesting
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-11-03 23:00 UTC)