AI solutions for drafting in Magic: the Gathering
AI-generated Key Points
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the key points are generated using the paper metadata rather than the full article.
- Authors explore drafting in Magic: the Gathering, a complex sub-game
- Drafting involves building decks by selecting cards from a shared pool
- Challenges include complex mechanics, multiplayer dynamics, hidden information, and vast search space
- Lack of high-quality public datasets for drafting research
- Authors present dataset with over 100,000 simulated and anonymized human drafts from Draftsim.com
- Four distinct strategies for drafting agents: primitive heuristic agent, expert-tuned complex heuristic agent, Naive Bayes agent, deep neural network agent
- Deep neural network agent outperforms other agents in emulating human drafting behavior
- Naive Bayes and expert-tuned agents surpass simple heuristics in performance
- AI agents' accuracy analyzed across different stages of draft process and various cards to approximate subtle inconsistencies in human behavior
- Work contributes to development of more human-like drafting agents and provides benchmarks for future drafting bots through dataset provided
Authors: Henry N. Ward, Daniel J. Brooks, Dan Troha, Bobby Mills, Arseny S. Khakhalin
Abstract: Drafting in Magic: the Gathering is a sub-game of a larger trading card game, where several players progressively build decks by picking cards from a common pool. Drafting poses an interesting problem for game-playing and AI research due to its large search space, mechanical complexity, multiplayer nature, and hidden information. Despite this, drafting remains understudied in part due to a lack of high-quality, public datasets. To rectify this problem, we present a dataset of over 100,000 simulated, anonymized human drafts collected from the website Draftsim.com. Additionally, we propose four diverse strategies for drafting agents, including a primitive heuristic agent, an expert-tuned complex heuristic agent, a Naive Bayes agent, and a deep neural network agent. We benchmark their ability to emulate human drafting, and show that the deep neural network agent outperforms all other agents, while Naive Bayes and expert-tuned agents outperform simple heuristics. We analyze the accuracy of AI agents across the timeline of a draft, for different cards, and in terms of approximating subtle inconsistencies of human behavior, and describe unique strengths and weaknesses for each agent. This work helps to identify next steps in the creation of humanlike drafting agents, and can serve as a set of useful benchmarks for the next generation of drafting bots.
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.
Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting
Score: 0
Why do we need votes?
Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.
The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.
⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.
Similar papers summarized with our AI tools
Navigate through even more similar papers through a
tree representationLook for similar papers (in beta version)
By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.