Set-Based Retrograde Analysis: Precomputing the Solution to 28-card Bridge Double Dummy Deals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Among the most popular games played worldwide, Bridge stands out for having had little AI progress for over 25 years. Ginsberg's Partition Search algorithm (1996) was a breakthrough for double-dummy Bridge play, allowing a program to reason about sets of states rather than individual states. Partition Search supports the current state of the art for both bidding and cardplay. In the time since, virtually no progress has been made in Bridge bidding. Inspired by Ginsberg's idea, this paper presents Setrograde Analysis, a new set-based algorithm for perfectly solving Bridge hands. Using this approach, we have solved all 7-trick (28-card) hands — 10^30 states, which can be reduced to 10^17 unique states using preexisting techniques. This was done by considering five orders of magnitude fewer sets than the traditional state-based Retrograde Analysis algorithm. This work suggests that the entire 13-trick (52-card) state space can be solved with modern technology using this new approach. The 7-trick computation represents the largest endgame database to date in any game.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.002 |
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.
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".