Combining Strategic Learning with Tactical Search in Real-Time Strategy Games
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A commonly used technique for managing AI complexity in real-time strategy (RTS) games is to use action and/or state abstractions. High-level abstractions can often lead to good strategic decision making, but tactical decision quality may suffer due to lost details. A competing method is to sample the search space which often leads to good tactical performance in simple scenarios, but poor high-level planning. We propose to use a deep convolutional neural network (CNN) to select among a limited set of abstract action choices, and to utilize the remaining computation time for game tree search to improve low level tactics. The CNN is trained by supervised learning on game states labelled by Puppet Search, a strategic search algorithm that uses action abstractions. The network is then used to select a script — an abstract action -— to produce low level actions for all units. Subsequently, the game tree search algorithm improves the tactical actions of a subset of units using a limited view of the game state only considering units close to opponent units. Experiments in the microRTS game show that the combined algorithm results in higher win-rates than either of its two independent components and other state-of-the-art microRTS agents. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first successful application of a convolutional network to play a full RTS game on standard game maps, as previous work has focused on sub-problems, such as combat, or on very small maps.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".