Prof. Dr. Alexander Asteroth
Refine
Departments, institutes and facilities
- Fachbereich Informatik (43)
- Institut für Technik, Ressourcenschonung und Energieeffizienz (TREE) (41)
- Fachbereich Ingenieurwissenschaften und Kommunikation (7)
- Internationales Zentrum für Nachhaltige Entwicklung (IZNE) (3)
- Institut für KI und Autonome Systeme (A2S) (1)
- Institut für Sicherheitsforschung (ISF) (1)
- Institute of Visual Computing (IVC) (1)
Document Type
- Conference Object (39)
- Article (11)
- Report (4)
- Book (monograph, edited volume) (1)
- Part of a Book (1)
- Diploma Thesis (1)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
- Preprint (1)
Year of publication
Keywords
- Quality diversity (4)
- MAP-Elites (3)
- Quality Diversity (3)
- Aerodynamics (2)
- Bayesian optimization (2)
- Evolutionary computation (2)
- Heart Rate Prediction (2)
- Neuroevolution (2)
- Surrogate Modeling (2)
- UAV (2)
Künstliche Intelligenz (KI) ist aus der heutigen Gesellschaft kaum noch wegzudenken. Auch im Sport haben Methoden der KI in den letzten Jahren mehr und mehr Einzug gehalten. Ob und inwieweit dabei allerdings die derzeitigen Potenziale der KI tatsächlich ausgeschöpft werden, ist bislang nicht untersucht worden. Der Nutzen von Methoden der KI im Sport ist unbestritten, jedoch treten bei der Umsetzung in die Praxis gravierende Probleme auf, was den Zugang zu Ressourcen, die Verfügbarkeit von Experten und den Umgang mit den Methoden und Daten betrifft. Die Ursache für die, verglichen mit anderen Anwendungsgebieten, langsame An- bzw. Übernahme von Methoden der KI in den Spitzensport ist nach Hypothese des Autorenteams auf mehrere Mismatches zwischen dem Anwendungsfeld und den KI-Methoden zurückzuführen. Diese Mismatches sind methodischer, struktureller und auch kommunikativer Art. In der vorliegenden Expertise werden Vorschläge abgeleitet, die zur Auflösung der Mismatches führen können und zugleich neue Transfer- und Synergiemöglichkeiten aufzeigen. Außerdem wurden drei Use Cases zu Trainingssteuerung, Leistungsdiagnostik und Wettkampfdiagnostik exemplarisch umgesetzt. Dies erfolgte in Form entsprechender Projektbeschreibungen. Dabei zeigt die Ausarbeitung, auf welche Art und Weise Probleme, die heute noch bei der Verbindung zwischen KI und Sport bestehen, möglichst ausgeräumt werden können. Eine empirische Umsetzung des Use Case Trainingssteuerung erfolgte im Radsport, weshalb dieser ausführlicher dargestellt wird.
Computers can help us to trigger our intuition about how to solve a problem. But how does a computer take into account what a user wants and update these triggers? User preferences are hard to model as they are by nature vague, depend on the user’s background and are not always deterministic, changing depending on the context and process under which they were established. We pose that the process of preference discovery should be the object of interest in computer aided design or ideation. The process should be transparent, informative, interactive and intuitive. We formulate Hyper-Pref, a cyclic co-creative process between human and computer, which triggers the user’s intuition about what is possible and is updated according to what the user wants based on their decisions. We combine quality diversity algorithms, a divergent optimization method that can produce many, diverse solutions, with variational autoencoders to both model that diversity as well as the user’s preferences, discovering the preference hypervolume within large search spaces.
This paper explores the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in elite sports. We approach the topic from two perspectives. Firstly, we provide a literature based overview of AI success stories in areas other than sports. We identified multiple approaches in the area of Machine Perception, Machine Learning and Modeling, Planning and Optimization as well as Interaction and Intervention, holding a potential for improving training and competition. Secondly, we discover the present status of AI use in elite sports. Therefore, in addition to another literature review, we interviewed leading sports scientist, which are closely connected to the main national service institute for elite sports in their countries. The analysis of this literature review and the interviews show that the most activity is carried out in the methodical categories of signal and image processing. However, projects in the field of modeling & planning have become increasingly popular within the last years. Based on these two perspectives, we extract deficits, issues and opportunities and summarize them in six key challenges faced by the sports analytics community. These challenges include data collection, controllability of an AI by the practitioners and explainability of AI results.
We consider multi-solution optimization and generative models for the generation of diverse artifacts and the discovery of novel solutions. In cases where the domain's factors of variation are unknown or too complex to encode manually, generative models can provide a learned latent space to approximate these factors. When used as a search space, however, the range and diversity of possible outputs are limited to the expressivity and generative capabilities of the learned model. We compare the output diversity of a quality diversity evolutionary search performed in two different search spaces: 1) a predefined parameterized space and 2) the latent space of a variational autoencoder model. We find that the search on an explicit parametric encoding creates more diverse artifact sets than searching the latent space. A learned model is better at interpolating between known data points than at extrapolating or expanding towards unseen examples. We recommend using a generative model's latent space primarily to measure similarity between artifacts rather than for search and generation. Whenever a parametric encoding is obtainable, it should be preferred over a learned representation as it produces a higher diversity of solutions.