homehome Home chatchat Notifications


Computer squares off against professional poker players - and loses badly

Even the best chess players are no match for computers these days, but computers are still struggling when it comes to games that have a random or unknown component. In games like Bridge or Poker, humans still hold the crown. Scientists from the Carnegie Mellon University tried to change that, by designing Claudico - a computer program built to defeat humans. But Claudico lost, badly.

Henry Conrad
May 11, 2015 @ 3:37 am

share Share

Even the best chess players are no match for computers these days, but computers are still struggling when it comes to games that have a random or unknown component. In games like Bridge or Poker, humans still hold the crown. Scientists from the Carnegie Mellon University tried to change that, by designing Claudico – a computer program built to defeat humans. But Claudico lost, badly.

“We knew Claudico was the strongest computer poker program in the world, but we had no idea before this competition how it would fare against four Top 10 poker players,” explains CMU professor computer science Tuomas Sandholm. He directed the development of the Claudico program, adding, “It would have been no shame for Claudico to lose to a set of such talented pros, so even pulling off a statistical tie with them is a tremendous achievement.”

The four pros each played over 20,000 hands with the software, and even though it lost, computer scientists believe the experiment was a complete success; according to them, it’s not a matter of if computers can ultimately win at poker, it’s a matter of when.

“I wouldn’t bet on the humans for too much longer,” said Michael Bowling, a computer science professor at the University of Alberta, Canada, who has developed one of the leading poker programs. “I would say now, after this [tournament] it will take one to three years” for a computer to beat top players, he said. “Up to this point, we just didn’t know how close we were.”

Needless to say, the poker man-vs-AI showdown was watched closely both by poker and AI enthusiasts alike. Humans won 9 of the 13 days of tournament, with a total difference of $732,713 (theoretical money). But when you consider that the total sum involved was over $150 million, that difference suddenly doesn’t seem that big.

“It’s definitely been a good run,” said Bjorn Li, who finished with the biggest lead over Claudico, $529,033. That earned him $44,676 from the $100,000 prize pot that the casino and co-sponsor Microsoft put up for the players to divide based on the outcome of the tournament. Doug Polk, the world’s No. 1-ranked online player, won $26,734; Dong Kyu Kim won $18,589; and Jason Les won $10,000.

Li too seems to believe that humans will eventually start losing at poker against an AI, but for now, he enjoys the fact that humans still rule the tables.

“We know theoretically that artificial intelligence is going to overtake us one day, But at the end of the day, the most important thing is that the humans remain on top for now.”

Doug Polk on the other hand believes that while the computer is definitely a formidable adversary, it still can’t replace humans, and it sometimes behaves completely erratically.

“Betting $19,000 to win a $700 pot just isn’t something that a person would do,” he says.

So why is it that computers destroy chess players, but not poker players? Does that signify that poker is somehow more complex then chess? Not really – the difference is in the nature of the game.

“In chess it’s a game of complete information, so when it’s your turn to move you know exactly what the state of the world is, what the state of the game is,” Sandholm said. “In poker, you don’t. This is really to be able to assist humans and companies in interacting, let’s say in negotiation,” Sandholm said. “Wouldn’t it be nice if you had an agent that helped you strategize in the world when you’re buying a car or buying insurance?”

A poker playing AI that would help me buy better insurance? Yep, that sounds good, but for now, researchers need to tweak Claudico’s algorithms.

share Share

This 5,500-year-old Kish tablet is the oldest written document

Beer, goats, and grains: here's what the oldest document reveals.

A Huge, Lazy Black Hole Is Redefining the Early Universe

Astronomers using the James Webb Space Telescope have discovered a massive, dormant black hole from just 800 million years after the Big Bang.

Did Columbus Bring Syphilis to Europe? Ancient DNA Suggests So

A new study pinpoints the origin of the STD to South America.

The Magnetic North Pole Has Shifted Again. Here’s Why It Matters

The magnetic North pole is now closer to Siberia than it is to Canada, and scientists aren't sure why.

For better or worse, machine learning is shaping biology research

Machine learning tools can increase the pace of biology research and open the door to new research questions, but the benefits don’t come without risks.

This Babylonian Student's 4,000-Year-Old Math Blunder Is Still Relatable Today

More than memorializing a math mistake, stone tablets show just how advanced the Babylonians were in their time.

Sixty Years Ago, We Nearly Wiped Out Bed Bugs. Then, They Started Changing

Driven to the brink of extinction, bed bugs adapted—and now pesticides are almost useless against them.

LG’s $60,000 Transparent TV Is So Luxe It’s Practically Invisible

This TV screen vanishes at the push of a button.

Couple Finds Giant Teeth in Backyard Belonging to 13,000-year-old Mastodon

A New York couple stumble upon an ancient mastodon fossil beneath their lawn.

Worms and Dogs Thrive in Chernobyl’s Radioactive Zone — and Scientists are Intrigued

In the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone, worms show no genetic damage despite living in highly radioactive soil, and free-ranging dogs persist despite contamination.