[NOT A COPY OF #34] We need an official statement about "colluding" or "handshake" strategies.

[shadowleafy]

The focus of the prisoner's dilemma is that both sides should be attempting to get the highest score, with no prior communication. Colluding strategies completely break this premise, allowing people to get ~4.5 scores with essentially no effort. Ban collusion.

[nobody5050]

See #34

[shadowleafy]

See #34

It's not that hard to make ~100-ish google alts. There's nothing stopping someone from doing it. It has to be banned or the contest will be ruined.

[nekiwo]

Yeah we need some official word on this

[shadowleafy]

Yeah we need some official word on this

Agreed. Should I rename the ticket so it doesn't just look like a duplicate of #34?

[cai-lw]

I have a feeling that the rules were made intentionally vague. Maybe tempting people to cheat is also part of the research.

Also it really isn't hard to prevent cheaters from actually claiming the money. They can just read the code of the top performers and require them to explain their code. Even in case of uninterpretable code like a neural network they can still ask for training data and training code.

[duckboycool]

There's this from the FAQ on the announcement video in terms of an official statement.

Q: Can't people flood the pool with dumb strategies that boost their own true strategy?
A: Perhaps! But, my Google submission Form only allows for one submission per Gmail account. So, if you have multiple Gmail accounts, I think you could submit multiple, but I'm hoping Google has been hampering down on bot accounts over the last decade or so!

[shadowleafy]

I have a feeling that the rules were made intentionally vague. Maybe tempting people to cheat is also part of the research.

Also it really isn't hard to prevent cheaters from actually claiming the money. They can just read the code of the top performers and require them to explain their code. Even in case of uninterpretable code like a neural network they can still ask for training data and training code.

Fair enough. I still would like an official response that isn't "it's discouraged" for winning the competition.

@duckboycool Saw that, but the way it's worded is vauge and seems to suggest that it's plausible but cary thinks it can't be abused. This thread is about how it could be abused.

[nobody5050]

I believe Cary made a comment in 34 discouraging it

[nobody5050]

Never mind I was mistaken

[carykh]

Yeah, colluding strategies are not allowed! When I'm reading through the strategies, if I see strategies putting arbitrary codes to check for friendly opponents who are in the same collusion, then I'll disqualify those strategies.

I'll put a QnA entry about that in the YouTube description now.

[shadowleafy]

Yeah, colluding strategies are not allowed! When I'm reading through the strategies, if I see strategies putting arbitrary codes to check for friendly opponents who are in the same collusion, then I'll disqualify those strategies.

I'll put a QnA entry about that in the YouTube description now.

Thank you for the response! I will be closing this now.