Buy

AI Beats Top F-16 Pilot In DARPA Dogfight Simulation

Discussion in 'Aviation Chat' started by Wade, Aug 21, 2020.

  1. Wade

    Wade Three Time F1 World Champ
    Rossa Subscribed Owner

    Mar 31, 2006
    32,193
    East Central, FL
    Full Name:
    Wade O.
  2. To remove this ad click here.

  3. FarmerDave

    FarmerDave F1 World Champ
    Consultant

    Jul 26, 2004
    15,186
    Full Name:
    IgnoranteWest
    I watched a video of an F18 driver's analysis of the exercise. Among his observations:

    Pilot had zero time in this particular sim.

    National Guard pilot - not knocking the individual or his mode of service, simply was observed that this was "average joe" fighter pilot.

    Video host F18 pilot suggested that the noise, Gforces, visual, and other physiological cues that are core to fighter pilot training, are absent in this type of Sim. That pilot would have been significantly impaired in ability to judge what maneuvers his opponent was engaging in, whether opponent energy increasing or decreasing, etc.

    That military never trains dogfighting skills and techniques in sims, only in flying aircraft, due to the importance of these inputs to decision making processes.

    A hit was only "was the gun lined up and in range," the AI did not have to click the trigger... effectively infinite ammo stream from AI guns

    Sim had relatively poor fidelity even for a sim.

    AI was "Omnipotent" basing decisions on receiving real time inputs of point in space, velocity directions, energy state changes, speeds, etc, 100% in real time and 100% of the exercise duration, as though it had a direct data flow from the opposing aircraft. An advantage that just is not realistic even if an AI was flying a real dogfight against an opposing real aircraft driven by a human. Whereas, Pilot had nothing other than his eyes to judge what his opponent was doing.
     
  4. rob lay

    rob lay Administrator
    Staff Member Admin Social Subscribed Miami 2018 Owner

    Dec 1, 2000
    54,817
    Southlake, TX
    Full Name:
    Rob Lay
    isn't this akin to a video game winning, haven't most video games been winning since 1982?
     
    INRange and FarmerDave like this.
  5. FarmerDave

    FarmerDave F1 World Champ
    Consultant

    Jul 26, 2004
    15,186
    Full Name:
    IgnoranteWest
    I'm probably incorrect or remembered incorrectly about some of these points. If you're groaning at my descriptions, I'm just a guy who watched a video a week ago!
     
  6. jcurry

    jcurry F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Jan 16, 2012
    16,967
    Lk Stevens, WA
    Full Name:
    Jim
    On avg, most fighter pilots are avg (relatively speaking);)

    All the same information could be given to a pilot on a head-up display via the same sensors that the AI has, but then the pilot would have to look at the data, assimilate it, and then act on it. Looking at the data on a head-up would require the pilot to take their eyes off the target, something you can't do in a close in dogfight (note: they do have helmet mounted displays, although not sure how prevalent they are on fighter aircraft, if at all currently). The time to look/consider/act versus how fast a computer AI could perform the same functions could be the difference in the outcome.
     
    FarmerDave likes this.
  7. To remove this ad click here.

  8. Hannibal308

    Hannibal308 F1 Veteran
    Rossa Subscribed

    Jan 3, 2012
    5,199
    Kahuku / Cottonwood
    Full Name:
    Will
    I think you are missing the point...the pilot not having a data stream of information available as was available for the AI platform is unimportant. What's important is the simulator deprived the pilot of the real world cues that are roughly equivalent to that stream. When we fight we can judge rates of change in a variety of parameters with our eyes, muscles, and brains. Changes in the enemy's position relative to our head position and other cues in the cockpit, for example, do not require us to have constantly avaialable digital data on the enemy's flight position and parameters as was available to the AI platform. Depriving the pilot of the human equivalent of that data stream, if the reports are correct, was a setup for failure.
     
    FarmerDave and Ak Jim like this.
  9. jcurry

    jcurry F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Jan 16, 2012
    16,967
    Lk Stevens, WA
    Full Name:
    Jim
    Obviously you have real world insight/experience here, but I don't think I am missing the point entirely. I agree that being in a sim would cause the human to be at a deficit, even IF they had a lot of time in a sim under these types of training scenarios. However, your analogy wrt to the data stream seems to me to be an analog vs digital comparison. Digital will win.
     
  10. Hannibal308

    Hannibal308 F1 Veteran
    Rossa Subscribed

    Jan 3, 2012
    5,199
    Kahuku / Cottonwood
    Full Name:
    Will
    Now I don't get it then. I thought you were advocating streaming data to a pilot through the HUD or helmet mounted displays in order to make the match up more equitable. I was simply pointing out that the pilot only needed what would be normally available to him in a real F-16 to make the match equitable...no need for any new tech. If the report is correct, the pilot was severely hand-cuffed and criteria for a win for the AI was overly sympathetic. More bogus grant money results...
     
    tritone likes this.
  11. jcurry

    jcurry F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Jan 16, 2012
    16,967
    Lk Stevens, WA
    Full Name:
    Jim
    yes, I was responding to the statement (opinion by an observer???) that the AI had an advantage due to available data.

    Don't disagree with that at all, except whether it would truly be equitable. The only true test is to fly it. Sim is not real. But I think a human using visual and physical cues will ultimately be slower reacting than an AI using sensor data.

    Would that surprise you?;) Not really any different than many of the early SDI tests. Any new tech requires an increasingly greater level of sophisticated tests to vet and refine it.
     
    Hannibal308 likes this.
  12. To remove this ad click here.

  13. Hannibal308

    Hannibal308 F1 Veteran
    Rossa Subscribed

    Jan 3, 2012
    5,199
    Kahuku / Cottonwood
    Full Name:
    Will
    Agreed. Particularly on the last point. If you've ever read some of my other points on manned versus unmanned fighters, you'll remember I'm a firm believer that we fighter pilots are soon to be shown the door. There are a million other ways to break other people's stuff with many that are way quicker and far more accurate.
     
    islerodreaming, tritone and Boomhauer like this.
  14. jcurry

    jcurry F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Jan 16, 2012
    16,967
    Lk Stevens, WA
    Full Name:
    Jim
    :eek: Don't say that. My BIL, who was a Top Gun instructor, has a son (Jr) who just entered fleet transition training(?) at Lemoore, whose wife just gave birth to a son (III). I'm sure Sr and Jr already have visions of III following in their foot steps (both Academy grads and Naval aviators).
     
    tritone and Hannibal308 like this.
  15. ralfabco

    ralfabco Two Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa

    Mar 1, 2002
    25,306
    banana republic of america
    Full Name:
    Itamar Ben-Gvir
  16. INRange

    INRange F1 Veteran
    Silver Subscribed

    Jan 27, 2014
    6,662
    Virginia
    Full Name:
    JD
    Isn't this the same as "trusting" online poker sites to play fair?
     
    kylec likes this.

Share This Page