MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020135152 · doi:10.1145/1273496.1273531

Combining online and offline knowledge in UCT

2007· article· en· W2020135152 on OpenAlexaff
Sylvain Gelly, David Silver

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Games
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceFunction (biology)Value (mathematics)Bellman equationOnline and offlineOffline learningMonte Carlo tree searchOnline algorithmArtificial intelligenceValue networkMonte Carlo methodMachine learningAlgorithmMathematical optimizationOnline learningMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The UCT algorithm learns a value function online using sample-based search. The TD(λ) algorithm can learn a value function offline for the on-policy distribution. We consider three approaches for combining offline and online value functions in the UCT algorithm. First, the offline value function is used as a default policy during Monte-Carlo simulation. Second, the UCT value function is combined with a rapid online estimate of action values. Third, the offline value function is used as prior knowledge in the UCT search tree. We evaluate these algorithms in 9 x 9 Go against GnuGo 3.7.10. The first algorithm performs better than UCT with a random simulation policy, but surprisingly, worse than UCT with a weaker, handcrafted simulation policy. The second algorithm outperforms UCT altogether. The third algorithm outperforms UCT with handcrafted prior knowledge. We combine these algorithms in MoGo, the world's strongest 9 x 9 Go program. Each technique significantly improves MoGo's playing strength.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations458
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArtificial Intelligence in GamesFrench-language works237,207