The Science of Betrayal

What are your winning tactics? Kill them all? Discuss strategy for the classic and variant games using the classic map, or visit the sub-forums for the variant maps.
Forum rules
Strategy
In addition to the general Forum Guidelines (see here: http://www.playdiplomacy.com/forum/view ... 30&t=15441), there are additional rules for posting in this forum.
1. When discussing strategy, reference should not be made to any active game. This section of the Forum is for general strategy discussion, not specific situations within games.
2. It follows that links, images, game name and/or number should not be added to a post if the game is active.
Posts which refer to a specific situation in an active game, or which link directly to an active game, are subject to editing or removal.

The Science of Betrayal

Postby super_dipsy » 29 Jan 2019, 13:52

Not like me to post here :) . However, I recently was chatting to Amby (he of the Diplomacy podcasts) and he mentioned an article he had read. I thought others might find it interesting, although to be honest it more whets the appetite rather than having too much concrete in. But I found it interesting anyway

https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/culture-beaker/few-key-signs-betray-betrayal
User avatar
super_dipsy
Premium Member
 
Posts: 11989
Joined: 04 Nov 2009, 17:43
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (1000)
All-game rating: (941)
Timezone: GMT

Re: The Science of Betrayal

Postby Phlegmatic » 29 Jan 2019, 18:43

Very interesting, thanks Dipsy!

This is also a great article that you might like:

http://grantland.com/features/diplomacy-the-board-game-of-the-alpha-nerds/
Phlegmatic
Premium Member
 
Posts: 82
Joined: 18 Jul 2018, 16:50
Location: Cheshire, UK
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1126
All-game rating: 1184
Timezone: GMT

Re: The Science of Betrayal

Postby DirtyHarry » 29 Jan 2019, 22:26

That was an interesting article, but I wish there was more "meat". More examples on how the comms changed before something bad was about to happen :-)
DirtyHarry
Premium Member
 
Posts: 101
Joined: 07 Feb 2017, 22:03
Location: Maryland, USA
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: 1334
All-game rating: 1362
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: The Science of Betrayal

Postby Tortellacci » 30 Jan 2019, 01:09

DirtyHarry wrote:That was an interesting article, but I wish there was more "meat". More examples on how the comms changed before something bad was about to happen :-)


^^ This. Granted the article was about betrayal and only used Diplomacy as an example, but regardless I wish there was more meat. Very interesting though. The program they mentioned predicted stabs over 50% of the time.. that's very good!
Tortellacci
Premium Member
 
Posts: 16
Joined: 04 May 2017, 00:54
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: 1261
All-game rating: 1324
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: The Science of Betrayal

Postby Calavera » 31 Jan 2019, 09:22

I might go against everyone's opinion, but this article is plain terrible. For instance, they have links every time they put a direct quote, but this link actually leads not the the interview or a paper, but to that person home page. Very similar are their other links - they don't lead to events or science papers, but to home pages of respective institutions or persons, or even Wikipedia articles about songs unrelated to the topic. The only actual link they provide is a grad student's site with article preprint.

At first I thought this is a classic scientist rapes reporter case, but the study they link to is not too rigorous itself. Its flaws are numerous. First, they do t-tests on random variables which they don't even try to qualify as normally distributed (quite a common thing in machine learning circles nowadays, but still very bad). Second, they have somewhat dubious definitions on what is friendship and what is betrayal in Diplomacy. Third, they state that "victims" of betrayal see it coming with nearly zero probability, but don't support this claim with anything. Fourth, they correctly indicate that length of a friendship is extremely important factor in betrayal chance, but neither incorporate it in their model, nor try to exclude it. Fifth, they don't specify a score measure. If we assume that 57% is a commonly used F1 score, then I believe regular Diplomacy players anticipate betrayals and non-betrayals with much greater accuracy (though I, obviously, don't have proof to support this).

Overall, a decent article for a grad student, maybe even publishable in local university journal. But not a serious study, and Science News website is not very scientific
Calavera
 
Posts: 22
Joined: 15 Mar 2010, 19:27
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: 991
All-game rating: 1083
Timezone: GMT+3


Return to Diplomacy Strategy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest