I'm in a martial art, and I'm looking for software that would help me diagram my strategies in different sparring situations. I want this to be a visual diagram.

It should allow me to show, say:

I) if I'm in stance X and my opponent is stance Y

A) I can do this

a) he can react with A

1) to which I can do blah

2) or something else

b) or he can react with B

1) to which I can do something

2) or something else


B) or I can do this

C) or I can do this

II) whereas if I'm in stance Y and he's also in Y

III) or if I'm in stance Y and he's in X

etc.

But I want to be able to have "situations" which can be referred to in multiple places in the diagram... (e.g. he has my sleeve and lapel, and I have his), since many situations would be reachable via multiple roads. Those shouldn't need to be duplicated.

And it would also be useful to have searchable attributes automatically added: e.g. show all decision nodes that are "children" of a certain grip position... even if those children are in radically different branches of the map.

And finally it would be great if I could also in this visual scheme easily link to other relevant info (e.g. drop in a video clip of a technique).

I want to be able to start creating the drawing from anywhere (in other words, start inputting a random situation in) and then insert it into the flow anywhere I like, or into multiple places.

Does this all make sense? Any ideas about the best software for this sort of thing? Flowchart? Mindmap? Infinite whiteboard? Something else? Any particular recs?

It's expensive, but Flying Logic is designed for what-if and decision tree modeling. You might take a look at it.

I think a flowchart would be your best bet. There must be any number of those to choose from.

This is actually a very sophisticated requirement – one you'd normally want dedicated software to achieve. Knowing a bit about martial arts myself, I can see a whole lot of ramifications of the various scenarios you've described. Not least, how best to describe them so users can "hook in" to the bits most immediately relevant to what they're trying to do. The combination of visual flows plus an underlying database for instant referencing is already complex – the option to fork into multiple possible responses, and then immediately fork again, well, that's really heavyweight stuff. That's because certain paths are going to converge with some paths, while other paths are going to diverge into their own specific areas. So you've got to take duplication/repetition into account as well.

I'm not at all convinced Flying Logic is powerful enough to do this – but it may be. Whether it also supports the appropriate visualisation I don't know. I can't immediately think of any software that could do what you're describing, although I can think of various software components that could be combined to build a tool for this kind of visualisation.

Any programmers in the forum with insights into the underlying requirements?

This is a very interesting use case!

I can understand the technical requirements, but I think that the actual visual rendering may be quite important in making the end result usefully inteligible.

Could you point us to 1-2 examples of an image which you consider suitable? It could be from a different thematic area, i.e., non martial-arts related.


digeratus wrote:

But I want to be able to have "situations" which can be referred to in
multiple places in the diagram... (e.g. he has my sleeve and lapel, and
I have his), since many situations would be reachable via multiple
roads. Those shouldn't need to be duplicated.

I was going to recommend a concept mapper such as VUE or CmapTools, but they're not cross-platform, and I imagine in a life-or-death combat situation, such as a street fight, having a mobile iOS or Android app with a powerful search function would be critical.

Exactly. I think you've explained it well, thanks.

MadaboutDana wrote:

This is actually a very sophisticated requirement – one you'd
normally want dedicated software to achieve. Knowing a bit about martial
arts myself, I can see a whole lot of ramifications of the various
scenarios you've described. Not least, how best to describe them so
users can "hook in" to the bits most immediately relevant to what
they're trying to do. The combination of visual flows plus an underlying
database for instant referencing is already complex – the
option to fork into multiple possible responses, and then immediately
fork again, well, that's really heavyweight stuff. That's because
certain paths are going to converge with some paths, while other paths
are going to diverge into their own specific areas. So you've got to
take duplication/repetition into account as well.

I'm not at all convinced Flying Logic is powerful enough to do this
– but it may be. Whether it also supports the appropriate
visualisation I don't know. I can't immediately think of any software
that could do what you're describing, although I can think of various
software components that could be combined to build a tool for this kind
of visualisation.

Any programmers in the forum with insights into the underlying
requirements?

Thanks for the thoughts so far!

As to the below question, I think you're right that the visual rendering would likely be critical in making the result intelligible. Unfortunately, however, I have to say, I'm not entirely clear on what such an image would look like! I think part of it is that I hope such a tool would give me interesting new views of the underlying information that I haven't yet anticipated and that would be useful. If I really played this out in great detail, I suspect the resultant decision model would be complex... I might not want to see it all at once in all its characteristics. I might want to see certain paths, certain situations, filter on certain attributes... I'm hoping the right software would help me do all this, would even give me ideas that I didn't have as to how to view this in new ways.

Alexander Deliyannis wrote:

This is a very interesting use case!

I can understand the technical requirements, but I think that the actual
visual rendering may be quite important in making the end result
usefully inteligible.

Could you point us to 1-2 examples of an image which you consider
suitable? It could be from a different thematic area, i.e., non
martial-arts related.


digeratus wrote:
>But I want to be able to have "situations" which can be referred to in
>multiple places in the diagram... (e.g. he has my sleeve and lapel, and
>I have his), since many situations would be reachable via multiple
>roads. Those shouldn't need to be duplicated.

Well this would be for studying at leisure, not use during a fight itself, so a mobile app is not necessary. So these are interesting ideas, thanks.

Dr Andus wrote:

I was going to recommend a concept mapper such as VUE or CmapTools, but
they're not cross-platform, and I imagine in a life-or-death combat
situation, such as a street fight, having a mobile iOS or Android app
with a powerful search function would be critical.

Dr Andus wrote:

I imagine in a life-or-death combat
situation, such as a street fight, having a mobile iOS or Android app
with a powerful search function would be critical.

"Wait while I consult my Hong Kong book of Kung Fu"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LY5kGuruKY

;0)

As a professional programmer and (mostly lapsed) ju-jitsu black belt, I think you best bet is to have a separate flow chart for each situation (lapel grab, front kick etc) and accompany each possible response branch with a image. You see a lot of these 3-4 image sequences in old martial arts books. But perhaps video is a better format.

--
Andy Brice
https://www.hyperplan.com
https://www.easydatatransform.com

As far as I understand, what you describe overall is a Decision Tree, with the added potential of linking to external resources, e.g., videos, in the various nodes. A quick search for decision tree graph software will bring up plenty of programmes, both desktop and web, dedicated or with a broader scope, which should be able to cover the main requirements.

A caveat is the (non-)duplication of "situations reachable via multiple roads". This implies multiple parents for those nodes ("situations") and this is tricky to show in a graph. For this I see three options:

(a) Replace such repeated situations with named or numbered references, e.g., "see Situation X1", wherever they appear; practical, but perhaps not visual enough.
(b) Use relationship links which bypass hierarchy; more visual, but can become messy if you have many such links.
(c) Use a software that supports multiple parents like TheBrain; this is the cleaner and probably more flexible solution, also with a strong search, but is mostly unsuitable for printing.


digeratus wrote:

But I want to be able to have "situations" which can be referred to in
multiple places in the diagram... (e.g. he has my sleeve and lapel, and
I have his), since many situations would be reachable via multiple
roads. Those shouldn't need to be duplicated.

And it would also be useful to have searchable attributes automatically
added: e.g. show all decision nodes that are "children" of a certain
grip position... even if those children are in radically different
branches of the map.

Hello,
First post.
This interested me very much because I also play chess.
The software I've used many years is called Bookup.
For those interested, it can be found at https://www.bookup.com/

The reason I am writing is it uses a minimax algorithm
to keep track of chess positions and shows what moves
have already been played in this position. When you choose one,
it uses that next position and shows the moves available there.

It is particularly helpful when you play different openings.
Say you play opening A for a very long time.
Now you are trying opening B.
Using opening B, you might get to a position
that has already occurred in opening A.
Therefore, you don't have enter anymore analysis
for that particular position as it is now linked to opening B and opening A.

I hope all that makes sense.
It sounds like this is something you want except for use with martial arts.

I am not technically inclined, therefore I don't know if incorporating
a minimax algorithm to software that displays and links pictures
is a lot of work or not.

I just wanted to make sure I understood what you were asking for and
this was the only example I could come up with.

I apologize in advance if this is inappropriate to this discussion.
Enjoy your day, Dan

Hi again,
I realize I was not very clear in some areas.

From each chess position, you can see the possible replies.
You select one of the replies, you now have a new chess position.
If this position matches an existing one, you are shown the replies
for that already exist for this position.

If you decide you don't like the new position, you can go back
to the previous position and choose another option and go from there.

How I picture the use for marital arts, which I know nothing about.
You and your opponent have starting positions/stances/whatever
from which there are certain responses.
You choose a response. You are shown a new position
that shows how your opponent can respond which results
in a new position with possible replies to his response.

If you decide, I can't allow myself to get into this predicament
again, choose a different response and see how that plays out.

I visited the Bookup website.
The programmer is selling the Dephi (language?) source code.
Anyway, I hope the above explanation is a little clearer.
Dan

Interesting software! Wish I had the ability to program something like that.

But it did make me think: it would be really cool if I could put in a few basic variables like my hand position: whether it's on his left or right sleeve, or left or right lapel, for example... and then where his hand is... and automatically have the software generate all possible combinations so that I could see the decision space.

I wonder if this is something that decision tree software has the ability to do? Does anyone know?

DDorak wrote:

Hi again,
I realize I was not very clear in some areas.

From each chess position, you can see the possible replies.
You select one of the replies, you now have a new chess position.
If this position matches an existing one, you are shown the replies
for that already exist for this position.

If you decide you don't like the new position, you can go back
to the previous position and choose another option and go from there.

How I picture the use for marital arts, which I know nothing about.
You and your opponent have starting positions/stances/whatever
from which there are certain responses.
You choose a response. You are shown a new position
that shows how your opponent can respond which results
in a new position with possible replies to his response.

If you decide, I can't allow myself to get into this predicament
again, choose a different response and see how that plays out.

I visited the Bookup website.
The programmer is selling the Dephi (language?) source code.
Anyway, I hope the above explanation is a little clearer.
Dan

A decision tree is just a graph to organise the options. It is part of the analysis that precedes and supports software development. As far as I know, software used to draw decision trees is simply graphic sketching software and does not include automation or other kind of 'smartness' (other than helping with the drawing itself, e.g., straightening hand drawn lines)


digeratus wrote:

I wonder if this is something that decision tree software has the ability to do? Does anyone know?

Instrumind Thinkcomposer (http://www.thinkcomposer.com/ is free concept mapping software that allows you to create multi-level maps. You can define templates for object types with custom fields and reuse them in the map, as well as defining relationship types.

The interface is from the 1990s and there is quite a learning curve, but you might be able to draw your map in it.

If you have the time learn the ins and outs of it, I am pretty sure Tinderbox can do it.
At some point, I was able to replicate the functions of Genealogy softwares with Tinderbox maps.

But, you should be ready to invest a large amount of time into it.

I think we can safely say that this software is going to demand a lot of time however you do it.

One important point: There's no way of automatically creating this – you'll have to set up the pathways manually. And before you can create the visual multi-map, you'll have to create flowcharts analysing the various positions and how you would flow from one to another.

Exactly how you do this may depend on the way your mind works. For example, I can see that it might be viable to use 3D modelling software to depict the situations (this approach is used in several martial arts app in Apple's App Store). I guess you'd have to set up your figures to respond to certain movements/situations in specific ways, which would involve an awful lot of programming. On the other hand, once you had programmed in a suitable set of responses, I guess you could then (semi-)automate some at least of the pathways.

The value of this approach remains doubtful, however: Whenever I look at martial arts apps that use software-generated figures, it's immediately obvious that they're not a realistic basis for learning, because they're not constrained by the standard physical issues that limit human movement. Above all, they don't show you the often very subtle shifts of balance and positioning required to perform certain movements (judo throws, for example, or any number of jiu jitsu holds and counters, or even standard kicking and punching movements. This is why videos of actual human beings performing the movements remain much more effective – the brain is capable of (semi-unconsciously) assessing aspects of balance/speed and angle of movement that simply don't appear in software-generated avatars.

You could do the whole thing as a series of interlocking videos, maybe? That would actually be pretty cool.

Just my thoughts!

Dellu wrote:

If you have the time learn the ins and outs of it, I am pretty sure
Tinderbox can do it.
At some point, I was able to replicate the functions of Genealogy
softwares with Tinderbox maps.

But, you should be ready to invest a large amount of time into it.

Well this is sounding increasingly like I should just go with pen and paper :D

MadaboutDana wrote:

I think we can safely say that this software is going to demand a lot of
time however you do it.

One important point: There's no way of automatically creating this
– you'll have to set up the pathways manually. And before you
can create the visual multi-map, you'll have to create flowcharts
analysing the various positions and how you would flow from one to
another.

Exactly how you do this may depend on the way your mind works. For
example, I can see that it might be viable to use 3D modelling software
to depict the situations (this approach is used in several martial arts
app in Apple's App Store). I guess you'd have to set up your figures to
respond to certain movements/situations in specific ways, which would
involve an awful lot of programming. On the other hand, once you had
programmed in a suitable set of responses, I guess you could then
(semi-)automate some at least of the pathways.

The value of this approach remains doubtful, however: Whenever I look at
martial arts apps that use software-generated figures, it's immediately
obvious that they're not a realistic basis for learning, because they're
not constrained by the standard physical issues that limit human
movement. Above all, they don't show you the often very subtle shifts of
balance and positioning required to perform certain movements (judo
throws, for example, or any number of jiu jitsu holds and counters, or
even standard kicking and punching movements. This is why videos of
actual human beings performing the movements remain much more effective
– the brain is capable of (semi-unconsciously) assessing
aspects of balance/speed and angle of movement that simply don't appear
in software-generated avatars.

You could do the whole thing as a series of interlocking videos, maybe?
That would actually be pretty cool.

Just my thoughts!

Dellu wrote:
If you have the time learn the ins and outs of it, I am pretty sure
>Tinderbox can do it.
>At some point, I was able to replicate the functions of Genealogy
>softwares with Tinderbox maps.
>
>But, you should be ready to invest a large amount of time into it.

A complex decision tree utility could have wide application.

Drug interaction and comorbidity, for example.

The problem with AI everywhere seems related to the replacement of personal pharmacists with insurance company help desks. Healthcare professionals need to know the patient.

GPT can write essays for you, but it can't know the reader.

Yeah, I'll stick to that argument, splitting my time between keeping kids off my lawn and hacking out my screeds.

Heh, I didn't want to discourage you, sorry! But on the other hand, maybe you need to define exactly what you want this tool for? Is it for learning? Reminding? Giving an already experienced practitioner choices? The appropriate tool could depend on precisely how you're going to use it.

digeratus wrote:

Well this is sounding increasingly like I should just go with pen and
paper :D

Yeah, good points! I was just thinking that it would help me, as an amateur athlete, to think through my options. I'd then also be able to systematically practice the sequences, see which ones I was less comfortable with, identify possibilities for improvement, etc.

A complex software representation of this is not at all necessary, as so many masters for so many generations have been amazing without anything like that.

But if it wasn't a huge amount of work to build something simple and illuminating, I was thinking, it would be kind of cool. But I don't want to be in the position of spending way more time tinkering with the software than the actual sport... :-)

MadaboutDana wrote:

Heh, I didn't want to discourage you, sorry! But on the other hand,
maybe you need to define exactly what you want this tool for? Is it for
learning? Reminding? Giving an already experienced practitioner choices?
The appropriate tool could depend on precisely how you're going to use
it.

digeratus wrote:
Well this is sounding increasingly like I should just go with pen and
>paper :D

Good points :)

Amontillado wrote:

A complex decision tree utility could have wide application.

Drug interaction and comorbidity, for example.

The problem with AI everywhere seems related to the replacement of
personal pharmacists with insurance company help desks. Healthcare
professionals need to know the patient.

GPT can write essays for you, but it can't know the reader.

Yeah, I'll stick to that argument, splitting my time between keeping
kids off my lawn and hacking out my screeds.

Very sorry indeed, the Wolf has to intervene here.

I don't follow Delyanni's suggestion to pay for TB since (whilst its "free" version is utterly worthless indeed) as far as I know, you have no real influence onto the graphical representation of that "decision tree" (Amontillado, totally correct!) on your screen, and so you'd be but totally lost after just some few "steps".

But then, ANY traditional but "professional" 2-pane outliner (i.e. with transclusion) is more or less (i.e. functionally, albeit possibly not also visually, to your liking?) "perfect" (but here again, user-sided tree-element formattings, as in UR, could be of big "help", for the complexity-reducing visual aspect, I suppose?!!); it's just that your "parallel streams" will be vertically, not horizontally...

It's the same consideration as with "timelines" for "creating" (timelines for "facts" (i.e. legal work, and the like) might fulfill a different purpose, especially for presentation purposes... see https://www.outlinersoftware.com/topics/viewt/9958/0/tree-elements-formatting-scrivener-aeon--the-wolf ), and indeed, you can put much more info into a vertical outline's tree, than in the available space of any horizontal visualization.

As an aside: This even applies to tools like UR (Ultra Recall, 100 bucks, not 300) which only allow 2-line representation for the title column, not also (as some other but otherwise inferior tools do) the replication of some "first paragraph" or the like of the content field, within the / some secondary tree), since, e.g.:

- no novelist (today; (just!) some contradictory examples from earlier Centuries being available though) will "put in" "executive's summary" titles on top of their scenes / chapters / subchapters, so they will have to "clip out", upon export to their publisher, their "titles" anyway, and thus, why not put those "summaries", etc, into the titles themselves?, and:

- ditto for playwrights, and as "we all" know, screenwriters will have to "title" their scenes by a very strict "Scene Headings" format, which does NOT tell about the scene's "content", so them, too, should, for better navigation while writing, put "their own titles" into the title line ("column"), ready to NOT being included upon export (UR comes with the toggle "include title" or then not...), whilst the mandatory "Scene Heading" should then be their respective first paragraph of their scenes' "content". - End of aside.

This being said, had it not been for its incredible bugginess - it crashed all too often -, I would have bought B-liner 6 (i.e. the last specific, dedicated, horizontal, electronic Warnier-Orr implementation, while it had been available; ironically, Deliannis' one of the few ones here who's got a license for it in time, and its demise being explained by the fact - common to askSam btw, oh yeah! - that in the end, the programmers who had done the code hadn't been available anymore, just the sales people...)

And then, some years ago, at "bits", at some incredible low price of just under 100 bucks if I remember well, that venerable "Graham Process Mapping" tool had been available, which ordinarily costs a multiple of that, and at the time, I had hesitated too long, instead of buying - I've had remorse about my non-purchase since, since since (haha) it never ever appeared on that site again... (Well, the connections to both abandoned, or then always viable, alternatives were implemented much better than in B-liner 6, cannot speak re it's - allegedly and equally much superior robustness though...)

But all of the above being said, the real info of today's probably being that wonderful-n-stunning confession of Pfizer's (now ex-?) director Jordon Trishton ("Johnny") Walker, which might quite fast disappear from YT indeed, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywlpArNWKxM - oh yeah.