Understanding the Success of Perfect Information Monte Carlo Sampling in Game Tree Search
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Perfect Information Monte Carlo (PIMC) search is a practical technique for playing imperfect information games that are too large to be optimally solved. Although PIMC search has been criticized in the past for its theoretical deficiencies, in practice it has often produced strong results in a variety of domains. In this paper, we set out to resolve this discrepancy. The contributions of the paper are twofold. First, we use synthetic game trees to identify game properties that result in strong or weak performance for PIMC search as compared to an optimal player. Second, we show how these properties can be detected in real games, and demonstrate that they do indeed appear to be good predictors of the strength of PIMC search. Thus, using the tools established in this paper, it should be possible to decide a priori whether PIMC search will be an effective approach to new and unexplored games.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it