Advertisement

The Game of Bridge: A Challenge for ILP

  • Swann Legras
  • Céline Rouveirol
  • Véronique Ventos
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11105)

Abstract

Designs of champion-level systems dedicated to a game have been considered as milestones for Artificial Intelligence. Such a success has not yet happened for the game of Bridge because (i) Bridge is a partially observable game (ii) a Bridge player must be able to explain at some point the meaning of his actions to his opponents. This paper presents a simple supervised learning problem in Bridge: given a ‘limit hand’, should a player bid or not, only considering his hand and the context of his decision. We describe this problem and some of its candidate modelisations. We then experiment state of the art propositional machine learning and ILP systems on this problem. Results of these preliminary experiments show that ILP systems are competitive or even outperform propositional Machine Learning systems. ILP systems are moreover able to build explicit models that have been validated by expert Bridge players.

References

  1. 1.
    Bethe, P.: The state of automated bridge play. PDF (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Blockeel, H., et al.: The ace data mining system user’s manual. https://dtai.cs.kuleuven.be/ACE/doc/ACEuser-1.2.16.pdf
  3. 3.
    Blockeel, H., De Raedt, L., Jacobs, N., Demoen, B.: Scaling up inductive logic programming by learning from interpretations. Data Min. Knowl. Discov. 3(1), 59–93 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    De Raedt, L., Kersting, K.: Probabilistic inductive logic programming. In: De Raedt, L., Frasconi, P., Kersting, K., Muggleton, S. (eds.) Probabilistic Inductive Logic Programming. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4911, pp. 1–27. Springer, Heidelberg (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78652-8_1CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dehaspe, L., Toivonen, H.: Discovery of frequent datalog patterns. Data Mining Knowl. Discov. 3(1), 7–36 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Frank, I., Basin, D., Bundy, A.: Combining knowledge and search to solve single-suit bridge. In: Proceedings of AAAI/IAAI, pp. 195–200 (2000)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ginsberg, M.L.: GIB: imperfect information in a computationally challenging game. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 14, 303–358 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ho, C.-Y., Lin, H.-T.: Contract bridge bidding by learning. In: Proceedings of Workshop on Computer Poker and Imperfect Information at AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (2015)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jamroga, W.: Modelling artificial intelligence on a case of bridge card play bidding. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Intelligent Information Systems, pp. 267–277 (1999)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kazemi, S.M., Poole, D.: RelNN: a deep neural model for relational learning. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Second AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (2018)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kok, S., Domingos, P.M.: Statistical predicate invention. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML 2007, pp. 433–440 (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mahmood, Z., Grant, A., Sharif, O.: Bridge for Beginners: A Complete Course. Pavilion Books, London (2014)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Metropolis, N., Ulam, S.: The Monte Carlo method. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 44(247), 335–341 (1949)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., Michel, V., Thirion, B.: Scikit-learn: machine learning in Python. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 12, 2825–2830 (2011)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Silver, D., Huang, A., Maddison, C.J., Guez, A., Sifre, L., et al.: Mastering the game of go with deep neural networks and tree search. Nature 529(7587), 484–489 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
  17. 17.
    Ventos, V., Costel, Y., Teytaud, O., Ventos, S.T.: Boosting a bridge artificial intelligence. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI), pp. 1280–1287. IEEE (2017)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ventos, V., Teytaud, O.: Le bridge, nouveau défi de l’intelligence artificielle? Revue d’Intelligence Artificielle 31(3), 249–279 (2017)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yeh, C.-K., Lin, H.-T.: Automatic bridge bidding using deep reinforcement learning. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ECAI, pp. 1362–1369 (2016)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.NUKKAI Inc.ParisFrance
  2. 2.L.I.P.N, UMR-CNRS 7030, Univ. Paris 13VilletaneuseFrance
  3. 3.L.R.I., UMR-CNRS 8623, Univ. Paris-SaclayOrsayFrance

Personalised recommendations