MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2781375226 · doi:10.1109/tg.2017.2785042

Move Prediction Using Deep Convolutional Neural Networks in <italic>Hex</italic>

2017· article· en· W2781375226 on OpenAlexafffund
Chao Gao, Ryan Hayward, Martin Müller

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Games · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Games
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkDeep learningMonte Carlo tree searchComputer scienceDeep neural networksChampionArtificial neural networkArtificial intelligenceMachine learningMonte Carlo methodMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using deep convolutional neural networks for move prediction has led to massive progress in computer Go. Like Go, Hex has a large branching factor that limits the success of shallow and selective search. We show that deep convolutional neural networks can be used to produce reliable move evaluation in the game of Hex. We begin by collecting self-play games of MoHex 2.0. We then train the neural networks by canonical maximum likelihood. The trained model was evaluated by playing against top programs Wolve and MoHex 2.0. Without any search, the resulting neural network produces similar playing strength as the highly optimized Resistance evaluation function used in Wolve. Finally, using the neural networks as prior knowledge, the reigning Monte-Carlo-tree-search-based world champion player MoHex 2.0 can be enhanced.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations15
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on GamesSame topicArtificial Intelligence in GamesFrench-language works237,207