Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
119 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
56 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
6 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

The Difficulty of Novelty Detection in Open-World Physical Domains: An Application to Angry Birds (2106.08670v2)

Published 16 Jun 2021 in cs.AI

Abstract: Detecting and responding to novel situations in open-world environments is a key capability of human cognition and is a persistent problem for AI systems. In an open-world, novelties can appear in many different forms and may be easy or hard to detect. Therefore, to accurately evaluate the novelty detection capability of AI systems, it is necessary to investigate how difficult it may be to detect different types of novelty. In this paper, we propose a qualitative physics-based method to quantify the difficulty of novelty detection focusing on open-world physical domains. We apply our method in the popular physics simulation game Angry Birds, and conduct a user study across different novelties to validate our method. Results indicate that our calculated detection difficulties are in line with those of human users.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (35)
  1. AIBirds-NoveltyTrack. 2021. Angry birds AI competition, novelty track. http://aibirds.org/angry-birds-ai-competition/novelty-track.html.
  2. AIBirds. 2021. Angry birds AI competition. http://aibirds.org/.
  3. 2020. Ogre: An object-based generalization for reasoning environment. In NeurIPS Workshop on Object Representations for Learning and Reasoning.
  4. 2020. Rapid trial-and-error learning with simulation supports flexible tool use and physical reasoning. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117(47):29302–29310.
  5. Allen, J. F. 1983. Maintaining knowledge about temporal intervals. Commun. ACM 26(11):832–843.
  6. 2011. Measuring the level of difficulty in single player video games. Entertainment Computing 2(4):205 – 213.
  7. 2019. Phyre: A new benchmark for physical reasoning. In NeurIPS.
  8. 2021. A unifying framework for formal theories of novelty: Framework, examples and discussion. In AAAI.
  9. 2018. Approaches to measuring the difficulty of games in dynamic difficulty adjustment systems. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 34(8):707–715.
  10. 2014. A search-based approach for generating angry birds levels. In 2014 IEEE Conference on Computational Intelligence and Games, 1–8.
  11. 2018. Where the really hard choices are: A general framework to quantify decision difficulty. bioRxiv.
  12. 2016. Visual detection of unknown objects in video games using qualitative stability analysis. IEEE Transactions on Computational Intelligence and AI in Games 8(2):166–177.
  13. 2010. Color appearance of real objects varying in material, hue, and shape. Journal of Vision 10(9):10–10.
  14. 2012. Does “task difficulty” explain “task-induced deactivation?”. Frontiers in Psychology 3:125.
  15. Langley, P. 2020. Open-world learning for radically autonomous agents. In AAAI.
  16. 2019. Are you angry (happy, sad) or aren’t you? emotion detection difficulty in email negotiation. Group Decision and Negotiation 28.
  17. 2021. A novelty-centric agent architecture for changing worlds. In AAMAS.
  18. 2008. Color appearance of familiar objects: Effects of object shape, texture, and illumination changes. Journal of Vision 8(5):13–13.
  19. OpenAI. 2021. Cartpole, openai gym. https://gym.openai.com/envs/CartPole-v1/.
  20. 2021. Detecting and adapting to novelty in games. In AAAI.
  21. Perner, P. 2018. Determining the similarity between two arbitrary 2d shapes and its application to biological objects. International Journal of Computer and Software Engineering.
  22. 2017. Physics Simulation Games. Singapore: Springer Singapore. 77–95.
  23. 2015. The angry birds AI competition. AI Magazine 36:85–87.
  24. 2020. Intphys: A benchmark for visual intuitive physics reasoning. ArXiv.
  25. 2020. Predicting Game Difficulty and Churn Without Players. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery. 585–593.
  26. SAIL-ON. 2019. Science of artificial intelligence and learning for open-world novelty (sail-on). https://iresearch-cms.tau.ac.il/sites/resauth.tau.ac.il/files/DARPA%20SAIL-ON_HR001119S0038.pdf.
  27. Senator, T. 2019. Science of artificial intelligence and learning for open-world novelty (sail-on). https://www.darpa.mil/program/science-of-artificial-intelligence-and-learning-for-open-world-novelty.
  28. 2017. Generating varied, stable and solvable levels for angry birds style physics games. In 2017 IEEE Conference on Computational Intelligence and Games (CIG), 288–295.
  29. 2019. The 2017 aibirds level generation competition. IEEE Transactions on Games 11(3):275–284.
  30. 2019. A phish scale: Rating human phishing message detection difficulty. In Workshop on Usable Security (USEC).
  31. 2010. Presence, involvement, and flow in digital games. Evaluating User Experience in Games: Concepts and Methods 23–46.
  32. 2016. Qualitative physics in angry birds. IEEE Transactions on Computational Intelligence and AI in Games 8(02):152–165.
  33. 2005. Learning to estimate query difficulty: Including applications to missing content detection and distributed information retrieval. Proc. ACM SIGIR Spec. Interest Group Inf. Retr. 512–519.
  34. 2014. Qualitative spatial representation and reasoning in angry birds: The extended rectangle algebra. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, KR’14, 378–387. AAAI Press.
  35. 2005. Measuring similarity among various shapes based on geometric matching. Geographical Analysis, v.37, 410-422 (2005) 37.
User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (5)
  1. Vimukthini Pinto (7 papers)
  2. Cheng Xue (42 papers)
  3. Chathura Nagoda Gamage (1 paper)
  4. Matthew Stephenson (35 papers)
  5. Jochen Renz (20 papers)
Citations (2)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.