Automatically generating novel and interesting games is a complex task.

Automatically generating novel and interesting games is a complex task.

We thank all three reviewers for their detailed and thoughtful reviews. "How about if the slopes differ?" Per your feedback, we ran new experiments where the slopes differ. "Do the players learn from previous experience?" We do not model the player's learning but plan to in future work.

One of the common artificial intelligence applications in electronic games consists of making an artificial agent learn how to execute some determined task successfully in a game environment. One way to perform this task is through machine learning algorithms capable of learning the sequence of actions required to win in a given game environment. There are several supervised learning techniques able to learn the correct answer for a problem through examples. However, when learning how to play electronic games, the correct answer might only be known by the end of the game, after all the actions were already taken. Thus, not being possible to measure the accuracy of each individual action to be taken at each time step. A way for dealing with this problem is through Neuroevolution, a method which trains Artificial Neural Networks using evolutionary algorithms. In this article, we introduce a framework for testing optimization algorithms with artificial agent controllers in electronic games, called EvoMan, which is inspired in the action-platformer game Mega Man II. The environment can be configured to run in different experiment modes, as single evolution, coevolution and others. To demonstrate some challenges regarding the proposed platform, as initial experiments we applied Neuroevolution using Genetic Algorithms and the NEAT algorithm, in the context of competitively coevolving two distinct agents in this game.

This paper presents Generalized Proof-Number Monte-Carlo Tree Search: a generalization of recently proposed combinations of Proof-Number Search (PNS) with Monte-Carlo Tree Search (MCTS), which use (dis)proof numbers to bias UCB1-based Selection strategies towards parts of the search that are expected to be easily (dis)proven. We propose three core modifications of prior combinations of PNS with MCTS. First, we track proof numbers per player. This reduces code complexity in the sense that we no longer need disproof numbers, and generalizes the technique to be applicable to games with more than two players. Second, we propose and extensively evaluate different methods of using proof numbers to bias the selection strategy, achieving strong performance with strategies that are simpler to implement and compute. Third, we merge our technique with Score Bounded MCTS, enabling the algorithm to prove and leverage upper and lower bounds on scores - as opposed to only proving wins or not-wins. Experiments demonstrate substantial performance increases, reaching the range of 80% for 8 out of the 11 tested board games.

Human-like agents are an increasingly important topic in games and beyond. Believable non-player characters enhance the gaming experience by improving immersion and providing entertainment. They also offer players the opportunity to engage with AI entities that can function as opponents, teachers, or cooperating partners. Additionally, in games where bots are prohibited -- and even more so in non-game environments -- there is a need for methods capable of identifying whether digital interactions occur with bots or humans. This leads to two fundamental research questions: (1) how to model and implement human-like AI, and (2) how to measure its degree of human likeness. This article offers two contributions. The first one is a survey of the most significant challenges in implementing human-like AI in games (or any virtual environment featuring simulated agents, although this article specifically focuses on games). Thirteen such challenges, both conceptual and technical, are discussed in detail. The second is an empirical study performed in a tactical video game that addresses the research question: "Is it possible to distinguish human players from bots (AI agents) based on empirical data?" A machine-learning approach using a custom deep recurrent convolutional neural network is presented. We hypothesize that the more challenging it is to create human-like AI for a given game, the easier it becomes to develop a method for distinguishing humans from AI-driven players.

There is much interest in using large pre-trained models in Automatic Game Design (AGD), whether via the generation of code, assets, or more abstract conceptualization of design ideas. But so far this interest largely stems from the ad hoc use of such generative models under persistent human supervision. Much work remains to show how these tools can be integrated into longer-time-horizon AGD pipelines, in which systems interface with game engines to test generated content autonomously. To this end, we introduce ScriptDoctor, a Large Language Model (LLM)-driven system for automatically generating and testing games in PuzzleScript, an expressive but highly constrained description language for turn-based puzzle games over 2D gridworlds. ScriptDoctor generates and tests game design ideas in an iterative loop, where human-authored examples are used to ground the system's output, compilation errors from the PuzzleScript engine are used to elicit functional code, and search-based agents play-test generated games. ScriptDoctor serves as a concrete example of the potential of automated, open-ended LLM-based workflows in generating novel game content.

Reinforcement Learning (RL) has emerged as a powerful paradigm in Artificial Intelligence (AI), enabling agents to learn optimal behaviors through interactions with their environments. Drawing from the foundations of trial and error, RL equips agents to make informed decisions through feedback in the form of rewards or penalties. This paper presents a comprehensive survey of RL, meticulously analyzing a wide range of algorithms, from foundational tabular methods to advanced Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) techniques. We categorize and evaluate these algorithms based on key criteria such as scalability, sample efficiency, and suitability. We compare the methods in the form of their strengths and weaknesses in diverse settings. Additionally, we offer practical insights into the selection and implementation of RL algorithms, addressing common challenges like convergence, stability, and the exploration-exploitation dilemma. This paper serves as a comprehensive reference for researchers and practitioners aiming to harness the full potential of RL in solving complex, real-world problems.