Using Convolution and Deep Learning in Gomoku Game Artificial Intelligence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gomoku is an ancient board game. The traditional approach to solving the Gomoku game is to apply tree search on a Gomoku game tree. Although the rules of Gomoku are straightforward, the game tree complexity is enormous. Unlike many other board games such as chess and Shogun, the Gomoku board state is more intuitive. That is to say, analyzing the visual patterns on a Gomoku game board is fundamental to play this game. In this paper, we designed a deep convolutional neural network model to help the machine learn from the training data (collected from human players). Based on this original neural network model, we made some changes and get two variant neural networks. We compared the performance of the original neural network with its variants in our experiments. Our original neural network model got 69% accuracy on the training data and 38% accuracy on the testing data. Because the decision made by the neural network is intuitive, we also designed a hard-coded convolution-based Gomoku evaluation function to assist the neural network in making decisions. This hybrid Gomoku artificial intelligence (AI) further improved the performance of a pure neural network-based Gomoku AI.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".