Monte Carlo Tree Search in the Presence of Transition Uncertainty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) is an immensely popular search-based framework used for decision making. It is traditionally applied to domains where a perfect simulation model of the environment is available. We study and improve MCTS in the context where the environment model is given but imperfect. We show that the discrepancy between the model and the actual environment can lead to significant performance degradation with standard MCTS. We therefore develop Uncertainty Adapted MCTS (UA-MCTS), a more robust algorithm within the MCTS framework. We estimate the transition uncertainty in the given model, and direct the search towards more certain transitions in the state space. We modify all four MCTS phases to improve the search behavior by considering these estimates. We prove, in the corrupted bandit case, that adding uncertainty information to adapt UCB leads to tighter regret bound than standard UCB. Empirically, we evaluate UA-MCTS and its individual components on the deterministic domains from the MinAtar test suite. Our results demonstrate that UA-MCTS strongly improves MCTS in the presence of model transition errors.
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 | 0.004 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".