Visiting guest. Why not sign in? |
News, knowledge and discussion for the AI enthusiast.
FEATURES |  | COMMUNITY |  | KNOWLEDGE |  | SEARCH |
Multiagent Systems The first comprehensive introduction to multiagent systems and contemporary distributed artificial intelligence suitable as a textbook, providing detailed coverage of basic topics as well as several closely related ones. More information at Amazon US UK |

Game Object Identification
Game Object Identification Hi, I am relative new to game AI but was doing some experiments and had a question: I was wondering why all pawns and actors in most games are identified by integers? Aren't strings more natural? I am aware of the performance impact of strings but maybe someone can elaborate on this! Jurgen | Jurgen Van Gael 7 posts. Wednesday 13 March, 13:06 Reply
Performance Although strings are more natural for humans, computers work best with numbers. Although there is indeed a performance hit when using strings, developers also (mainly?) use integers because it requires more complex code to handle text-strings. In the end, on today's hardware, it's a matter of preference I guess. I prefer integers over strings for something like that. Jeroen | jeroen 28 posts. Wednesday 13 March, 14:21 Reply
Concept and Implementation This is the same thing fundamentally. Whether you use integer arithmetic or more complex string operations, it means the same to the Artificial Intelligence code.
This is fundamentally the same thing! More natural, i.e. human-like ways of handling things would involve two concepts: A) Attributes Each object is not identified uniquely, but has a set of sensory facts that can identify it. How these are perceived influence the judgement of its unique identity. B) Taxonomies Also known as type hierarchies, or relationships between objects. A dog is a kind of animal. I believe humans learn this through the years, but its fair to assume each object broadcasts its type (an assumption often made in AI), more or less precisely depending on sensory accuracy. So you see, the implementation doesn't really matter, it's the concept behind the scenes that matter. | Alex J. Champandard 934 posts. Wednesday 13 March, 20:21 Reply
Languages Ok, Thanks, I think I get it! If you think about it is quite logic: humans use names ("strings") to address each other, dogs use barks ("sound") and you could make computer use numerics to address each other. It's all a mather of how you invent and define your communication language. Thanks guys, Jurgen | Jurgen Van Gael 7 posts. Thursday 14 March, 06:12 Reply