Re: [game-lang] a survey of previous work

[Marc Lanctot <lanctot@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 07/24/2010 06:59 AM, Joel Uckelman wrote:
> Thus spake Marc Lanctot:
> > I don't mean to sound like a broken record, but... I'd really like to
> > know why we wouldn't want to form a superset of GDL.
>
> I'm not saying we don't. I'm not saying either way yet, as I haven't
> had a chance to seriously study GDL yet.

Alright. Maybe we should start more like a reading group; each week we 
can discuss what we read, why it's good for our purpose, or why it's 
not, and then eventually we'll have the ground knowledge to know where 
to go from there. There isn't a huge literature out there, but there are 
some very relevant places to start. I'm not a GDL expert, but since it's 
the most-used and extensively studied general game language, we should 
probably have a good grasp on its strengths and weaknesses.

Any objections? This seemed to be the direction we were going anyway, so 
I hope not.

Before that, we should probably agree on what our goal is :)

I'll now follow-up on Gala.

  http://voidstar.boldlygoingnowhere.org/lanctot/tmp/koller97gala.pdf

Gala is a language for representing extensive-form games with imperfect 
information (the mathematical description of 'game'). It was designed by 
Daphne Koller et. al., the same people who designed a popular algorithm 
called "Sequence-Form Linear Programming" for finding Nash Equilibria in 
imperfect information, circa 1994. As far as I know,  they designed Gala 
specifically because they released an implementation of their algorithm 
and wanted people to use it to 'solve' games. I don't know how much we 
can gain from this (I don't know how many people are using it, I don't 
know much about it.. ), but it's a start.

Marc

_______________________________________________
game-lang mailing list
game-lang@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/game-lang