MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102256448 · doi:10.1109/tciaig.2010.2067212

Monte Carlo Tree Search in Hex

2010· article· en· W2102256448 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Computational Intelligence and AI in Games · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Games
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo tree searchMonte Carlo methodGame treeComputer scienceTree (set theory)OlympiadTheoretical computer scienceAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceGame theoryMathematicsMathematical economicsCombinatoricsStatisticsSequential game

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hex, the classic board game invented by Piet Hein in 1942 and independently by John Nash in 1948, has been a domain of AI research since Claude Shannon's seminal work in the 1950s. Until the Monte Carlo Go revolution a few years ago, the best computer Hex players used knowledge-intensive alpha-beta search. Since that time, strong Monte Carlo Hex players have appeared that are on par with the best alpha-beta Hex players. In this paper, we describe MoHex, the Monte Carlo tree search Hex player that won gold at the 2009 Computer Olympiad. Our main contributions to Monte Carlo tree search include using inferior cell analysis and connection strategy computation to prune the search tree. In particular, we run our random game simulations not on the actual game position, but on a reduced equivalent board.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.746
Threshold uncertainty score0.909

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.278 · 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