MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2526893957 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v30i1.9856

BeeMo, a Monte Carlo Simulation Agent for Playing Parameterized Poker Squares

2016· article· en· W2526893957 on OpenAlexaff
Karo Castro-Wunsch, William Maga, Cǎlin Anton

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Games
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParameterized complexityMonte Carlo methodMonte Carlo tree searchComputer scienceHeuristicDimension (graph theory)Mathematical optimizationRepresentation (politics)Greedy algorithmAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceMathematicsStatisticsCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated Parameterized Poker Squares to approximate an optimal game playing agent. We organized our inquiry along three dimensions: partial hand representation, search algorithms, and partial hand utility learning. For each dimension we implemented and evaluated several designs, among which we selected the best strategies to use for BeeMo, our final product. BeeMo uses a parallel flat Monte-Carlo search. The search is guided by a heuristic based on hand patterns utilities, which are learned through an iterative improvement method involving Monte-Carlo simulations and optimized greedy search.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.558
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicArtificial Intelligence in GamesFrench-language works237,207