Identifying Critical Positions Based on Conspiracy Numbers
Abstract
Research in two-player perfect information games has been one of the focuses of computer-game related studies in the domain of artificial intelligence. However, focus on an effective search program is insufficient to give the “taste” of actual entertainment in the gaming industry. Instead of focusing on effective search algorithm, we dedicate our study in realizing the possibility of applying strategy changing technique. However, quantifying and determining this possibility is the main challenge imposed in this study. For this purpose, the Conspiracy Number Search algorithm is considered where the maximum and minimum conspiracy numbers are recorded in the test bed of simple Tic-Tac-Toe and Othello game application. We analysed these numbers as the measures of critical position identifier which determines the right moment for possibility of applying strategy changing technique. For Tic-Tac-Toe game, the conspiracy numbers are analysed through operators formally defined in this article as \(\uparrow tactic\) and \(\downarrow tactic\) while variance of the conspiracy numbers are analysed in Othello game. Interesting results are obtained with convincing evidences but future works are still needed in order to further strengthen our hypothesis.
Keywords
Tic-Tac-Toe Othello Conspiracy numbersNotes
Acknowledgement
This research is funded by a grant from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, in the framework of the Grant-in-Aid for Challenging Exploratory Research (grant number26540189).
References
- 1.van den Herik, H.J., Donkers, H., Spronck, P.H.: Opponent modelling and commercial games. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 2005 Symposium on Computational Intelligence and Games (CIG05), pp. 15–25 (2005)Google Scholar
- 2.Iida, H., Uiterwijk, J., van den Herik, H.J., Herschberg, I.: Potential applications of opponent-model search: Part 1. The domain of applicability. ICCA J. 16, 201–208 (1993)Google Scholar
- 3.Carmel, D., Markovitch, S.: Learning models of opponent’s strategy in game playing. Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Center for Intelligent Systems (1993)Google Scholar
- 4.Iida, H., Uiterwijk, J., van den Herik, H.J., Herschberg, I.: Potential applications of opponent-model search. Part 2: risks and strategies. ICCA J. 17, 10–14 (1994)Google Scholar
- 5.Lorenz, U., Rottmann, V., Feldmann, R., Mysliwietz, P.: Controlled conspiracy number search. ICCA J. 18, 135–147 (1995)Google Scholar
- 6.Schaeffer, J., van den Herik, H.J.: Games, computers, and artificial intelligence. Chips Challenging Champions Games Comput. Artif. Intell. 134, 1–8 (2002)MATHGoogle Scholar
- 7.Kishimoto, A., Winands, M.H., Müller, M., Saito, J.T.: Game-tree search using proof numbers: the first twenty years. ICGA J. 35, 131–156 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Jansen, P.: Using knowledge about the opponent in game-tree search. Ph.D. thesis, Carnegie Mellon University (1992)Google Scholar
- 9.Donkers, J.: Nosce Hostem: Searching with Opponent Models. Ph.D. thesis, Universiteit Maastricht (2003)Google Scholar
- 10.Ramon, J., Jacobs, N., Blockeel, H.: Opponent modeling by analysing play. In: Proceedings of Workshop on Agents in Computer Games. Citeseer (2002)Google Scholar
- 11.McAllester, D.A.: A new procedure for growing min-max trees. Technical report, Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, MIT, Cambridge, MA, USA (1985)Google Scholar
- 12.McAllester, D.A.: Conspiracy numbers for min-max search. Artif. Intell. 35, 287–310 (1988)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 13.Schaeffer, J.: Conspiracy numbers. Adv. Comput. Chess 5, 199–218 (1989)Google Scholar
- 14.Elkan, C.: Conspiracy numbers and caching for searching and/or trees and theorem-proving. In: IJCAI, pp. 341–348 (1989)Google Scholar
- 15.Schaeffer, J.: Conspiracy numbers. Artif. Intell. 43, 67–84 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.van der Meulen, M.: Conspiracy-number search. ICCA J. 13, 3–14 (1990)Google Scholar
- 17.Allis, L.V., van der Meulen, M., van den Herik, H.J.: Proof-number search. Artif. Intell. 66, 91–124 (1994)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 18.Neumann, L.J., Morgenstern, O.: Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, vol. 60. Princeton University Press Princeton, NJ (1947)MATHGoogle Scholar
- 19.Shannon, C.E.: Xxii. programming a computer for playing chess. Philos. Mag. 41, 256–275 (1950)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 20.McAllester, D.A., Yuret, D.: Alpha-beta-conspiracy search (1993)Google Scholar
- 21.Buro, M.: From simple features to sophisticated evaluation functions. In: van den Herik, H.J., Iida, H. (eds.) CG 1998. LNCS, vol. 1558, pp. 126–145. Springer, Heidelberg (1999) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Rosenbloom, P.S.: A world-championship-level othello program. Artif. Intell. 19, 279–320 (1982)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 23.Landau, T.: Othello: Brief & basic. US Othello Association 920, pp. 22980–23425 (1985)Google Scholar
- 24.Ishitobi, T., Cincotti, A., Iida, H.: Shape-keeping technique and its application to checkmate problem composition. In: Ninth Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment Conference (2013)Google Scholar