
Ubisoft is using AI to catch bugs in games before devs make them - helloworld
http://www.wired.co.uk/article/ubisoft-commit-assist-ai
======
iMart1n_FR
The title is missleading!

The code is checked when it is pushed to the main repository... The code and
the bug already exists, the developer is responsible for that.

Also, if you look at the video from Youtube, you can see that 60% + 30% = 100%
:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5C4FUvDyCc&t=50s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5C4FUvDyCc&t=50s)

I was hoping for some kind of godlike AI to help catching bugs before I write
my code, now I'm disappointed...

~~~
chrisfosterelli
> Also, if you look at the video from Youtube, you can see that 60% + 30% =
> 100%

They said it catches 60% of bugs and has 30% false alarms. Those are different
measurements, the sum of true positives and false positives doesn't need to
add up to 100%.

~~~
lrem
So you're saying that 10% of time it says there's no bug? ;)

~~~
eftychis
> So you're saying that 10% of time it says there's no bug? ;)

No. Recall the wording: "They said it catches 60% of bugs and has 30% false
alarms. Those are different measurements, the sum of true positives and false
positives doesn't need to add up to 100%."

Hence (nitpicking perhaps): 100%-60%=40% of the bugs (their estimation) are
not caught (false negatives) The rate of false positives is 30%, that is if a
particular code excerpt has no bugs it might be tagged as buggy.

Thus the final error rate I guess is (actual probability of a bug) _60% + (1-
(actual probability of a bug))_ 30%.

------
nailer
> When a player encounters a non-player character in Far Cry 5, two systems
> are at work: trust and morale. If you raise your weapon at someone you've
> never met before, they will react with distrust or fear, warning you to
> lower your gun. If the NPC recognises a lingering threat from you, it will
> launch an attack of its own, fearing for its own 'life'. When facing a group
> of enemies, as you pick off members of a gang, individual foes may realise
> they're outclassed and lose their thirst for combat, and attempt to flee as
> they sees their 'friends' taken out. Elsewhere, animal companions will
> respond to player activity, cowing close to the ground unprompted when you
> crouch into stealth, for instance. It's the sort of work that adds depth and
> realism to the world.

Fascinating. Meanwhile, watch Fred (a friendly AI in Far Cry 5) fly the player
directly over a known enemy outpost, crash the helicopter, then later crouch
immediately in front of the player when the player is trying to stalk the
outpost - to the point where the weakness of the AI becomes the talking main
point of the video:

[https://youtu.be/iauG9h6N-PQ?t=377](https://youtu.be/iauG9h6N-PQ?t=377)

Totally agreed one day this will make a difference, but in the meantime: game
AI is still game AI.

~~~
nikanj
Programmed at 5am by some poor soul on crunch mode, after an 80-hour work week
and 3 hours of sleep.

Whenever a game has an absolutely heinous component to it, it’s clear that
that particular bit was not playtested.

~~~
nailer
It seems to contrast the messaging from Ubisoft though. Why doesn't the NPC
fear the cult symbol all over the outpost? Why don't they fear the line of
sight from the player's weapon?

------
YeGoblynQueenne
>> "The fact that when you show a programmer statistics that say 'hey,
apparently you're making a bug!', you want him or her [to realise] that it's a
tool to help and go faster.

To be fair, if I get a message along the lines of "There's a 0.345 chance that
this line will cause a bug", I'll want to know _why_ the line will lead to a
bug- which is going to be a lot harder to do than just throw up a statisic.

------
adamnemecek
If only there was some sort of way to statically encode and check your
logic...oh wait.

