How Tetris Builds Our Gaming I.Q
It takes more than just playing Tetris to bump your skills in DOTA 2 and Call of Duty . . .
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute’s Department of
Cognitive Science is trying to find ways in which we can get better at
video games. The Lead Researcher, PhD student John Lindstedt (under
Principle Investigator Wayne Gray), is using an in-house coded version
of Tetris to study the learning and cognitive training process within
the context of developing teaching method that would increase a person’s
skill in the games they play.
The research event that I participated in at
Genericon XXVIII was disguised as a 'Tetris tournament'. Players
registered to compete for the highest score, in which the top three
players earned cash prizes. It initially sounded intimidating, but the
overly welcoming nature of the research students made it anything but.
“We used the tournament as a way to attract
skilled players while, in reality, we want to gather players of all
skill levels,” Lindstedt says. “That's why we try to make the atmosphere
generally relaxed and as fun as we can, so that when we say ‘Hey! It's
free, and it's for science!’ We get people who think, ‘Ah, what the
heck’, rather than ‘Oh, no, I couldn't, I'm terrible, I'll mess up your
study.’”
After taking part, I can attest to the fact that
they succeeded. Play sessions were individualised, with each participant
paired with a desktop and a technician. All were given two playthroughs
to compensate for any bad runs. But, given that the nature of the term
‘tournament’ and the opportunity to win cash prizes would almost
inevitably attract more skilled players, the research team also holds
sessions throughout the school year to observe enrolled students as
well. All of this has gone towards gathering data over the past three
years.
CogWorks Lab's coded version of Tetris, otherwise
known as 'Meta-T', is specifically designed to gather that data. Every
key stroke, every block rotation, and in some cases, even eye movement
(not studied in the tournament) is tracked and compiled into data with
millisecond accuracy. Meta-T provides various experimental options, like
narrowing the field of vision using eye tracking, and altering the
Tetrominoes’ fall rate completely. Meta-T also allows for comparative
data collection between skilled and novice players - helpful for
identifying areas where less skilled players can improve.
One of the most fascinating aspects of Meta-T,
however, is its support for computational cognitive modelling (or to
break down those eleven syllables, CCM). Lindstedt explained this as an
artificial intelligence that’s “still written in code, but its purpose
is to make the computer behave in some of the same ways as humans”.
Computational cognitive modelling scales back
from the computational processing that typical AIs use to come to a
solution. Instead, coming up with an answer instantaneously, like
humans, the process that a CCM takes in reaching a solution occurs in
stages.
Here, Lindstedt highlights the difference between AIs and CCMs:
“An AI can churn through a billion numbers per
second, simulating 50 moves ahead, all within a millisecond of the block
appearing on the screen. A cognitive model does things differently. It
has to shift its attention to the block (a couple hundred milliseconds),
it has to focus on it for a moment to comprehend it (a few hundred
more), it has to then look around to see how that block could fit into
the existing pile (a few more), then it has to press its first key (150
milliseconds minimum), all still happening in under a second; it's a
snail’s pace compared to its AI cousin.”
WE ARE FOSSASIA STAY CONNECTED WITH US . . .
WE ARE FOSSASIA STAY CONNECTED WITH US . . .
The research purposes of developing such models
is to allow researchers to tangibly study the human thought process.
This is done by altering the CCMs parts to test various results. It
would be impossible to do so any other way outside of some sort of
psychic puppetry one could imagine in science fiction.
Interestingly enough, however, the team has also
incorporated a system of AIs that sound similar to these CCMs. For the
purpose of highlighting areas of improvement in player skill, the team
developed AI systems operating as automated coaches. While they aren't
able to manoeuvre Tetris at the same level as highly skilled players,
they certainly can teach less experienced players a thing or two.
“So, the AI systems we’re developing are actually
being used right now in a study examining different automated methods
of coaching (i.e., using suggestions from the AI to give guidance to
players),” Lindstedt explains. “The systems are super simple (just using
simple addition and multiplication to rate “good” vs “bad” options in
the game), so no Skynet to be found here!”
But in efforts to further develop a proper
framework used to coach and increase player skill, the subject’s
cognitive capabilities need to be taken into consideration. When I asked
if the research team has considered the classic trifecta of learning
methods: visual, auditory, and tactile, Lindstedt said something that I
wasn’t expecting:
“Those three individualized methods of learning have since been discredited over the years.”
“Really?” I ask.
“There really isn’t such a thing as learners who
strictly learn through one or the other. It would be inefficient for a
teacher to develop three separate ways to teach a classroom full of
students.” He continues, “...if I can find an effective way to teach
something visually, everyone in the classroom should benefit from that.
You can’t really put anyone in a box.”
Lindstedt pointed me to this Wired article which discusses how the traditional learning styles is largely a myth.
Of course, while Lindstedt states that such
discrimination in learning types doesn’t necessarily exist in the
categorized manner we were all once taught, he is aware of the various
factors that can influence one’s ability to learn:
“I guess a limitation of our experiment is not
factoring in various physiological, psychological, and biological
factors that can impact player-measured performance in our research. The
real question, however, is that have those differences predisposed them
to playing video games, or have playing video games helped them develop
these differences and skill sets?”
Essentially, he’s asking which came first: the
chicken or the egg. Over the years, to shake up the conventional
'wisdom' about video games having a violent impact on children, there
have been several research studies and experiments correlating playing
video games with other activities such as eye tracking and rapid
decision making. Many of these have analysed the direct changes in
efficiency right after playing games. But one might ask whether or not
the physiological make-up of some participants, or the chance that some
might be closeted gamers, had an impact on the results of each study.
With such an ambitious undertaking, there is the
inevitable question everyone wants answered: “Can you train me to
perform at E-Sports level?”
“It’s an impossible question to answer at this point," Lindstedt says.
"When folks talk about getting better at games,
the idea is to train, and train, and train. But for some people, that’s
not enough. Folks may eventually hit a plateau, but we want to move past
that. We want to meet them at their perceived limit and then find ways
to grind them even further,” he adds.
We’ve all experienced the stark contrast between
competing against ourselves, friends, within global leaderboards, and in
online matches. It’s like there’s a dense cognitive barricade that’s
preventing us to do what many skilled players do so easily.
When I hear that researchers are actively trying
to develop methods to improve player performance, especially in a market
where couch and online gaming are becoming more commonplace, it sparks
excitement.
"Video games are an excellent domain for this
sort of research, especially with respect to the immense cognitive
skills these players often display...There’s near limitless enthusiasm
for Tetris, both from its players and from fellow researchers hearing
about its relevance to cognitive science for the first time— a
researcher couldn’t ask for better."
Source : powerupgaming
Source : powerupgaming
No comments:
Post a Comment