MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153678894

Achieving master level play in 9×9 computer go

2008· article· en· W2153678894 on OpenAlexaff
Sylvain Gelly, David Silver

Bibliographic record

VenueUCL Discovery (University College London) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Games
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceHeuristicArtificial intelligenceMonte Carlo tree searchFunction (biology)Value (mathematics)Tree (set theory)State (computer science)Bellman equationMonte Carlo methodDomain (mathematical analysis)Machine learningAlgorithmTheoretical computer scienceMathematical optimizationMathematicsStatistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The UCT algorithm uses Monte-Carlo simulation to estimate the value of states in a search tree from the current state. However, the first time a state is encountered, UCT has no knowledge, and is unable to generalise from previous experience. We describe two extensions that address these weaknesses. Our first algorithm, heuristic UCT, incorporates prior knowledge in the form of a value function. The value function can be learned offline, using a linear combination of a million binary features, with weights trained by temporal-difference learning. Our second algorithm, UCT-RAVE, forms a rapid online generalisation based on the value of moves. We applied our algorithms to the domain of 9 • 9 Computer Go, using the program MoGo. Using both heuristic UCT and RAVE, MoGo became the first program to achieve human master level in competitive play. Copyright © 2008.

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)0.004
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.174 · 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

Citations121
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUCL Discovery (University College London)Same topicArtificial Intelligence in GamesFrench-language works237,207