MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041979085 · doi:10.1109/pacrim.2013.6625444

Improved tree-based strategies for a Connect6 threat-based hardware design

2013· article· en· W2041979085 on OpenAlexafffund
Martin Koch, Sven Schmidt, Rainer Herpers, Kenneth B. Kent

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Games
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDeutscher Akademischer AustauschdienstCMC Microsystems
KeywordsComputer scienceField-programmable gate arrayImplementationTree (set theory)State (computer science)Field (mathematics)Embedded systemComputer securitySoftware engineeringAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Connect6 is a member of the k-in-a-row games family and attracts attention through its fairness and game complexity. Several very good strategies for Connect6 exist. In this paper we improve an already existing threat-based hardware design, which only evaluates the actual allocation of the game board. This strategy calculates a best move and waits until it wins or loses in the next two moves after the actual state. Our new proposed strategies think ahead and try to advance the player into a better position for the subsequent moves. We implemented three strategies with different winning chances, but all with clear advantages against the original strategy. This could be achieved without a much longer time for calculation and without the need of much more memory capacity. The implementations are validated on an Altera DE2 board, which contains a Cyclone II field-programmable gate array.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArtificial Intelligence in GamesFrench-language works237,207