Paper detail

Evolving the MCTS Upper Confidence Bounds for Trees Using a Semantic-inspired Evolutionary Algorithm in the Game of Carcassonne

Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) is a sampling best-first method to search for optimal decisions. The success of MCTS depends heavily on how the tree is built and the selection process plays a fundamental role in this. One particular selection mechanism that has proved to be reliable is based on the Upper Confidence Bounds for Trees (UCT). The UCT attempts to balance exploration and exploitation by considering the values stored in the statistical tree of the MCTS. However, some tuning of the MCTS UCT is necessary for this to work well. In this work, we use Evolutionary Algorithms (EAs) to evolve mathematical expressions with the goal to substitute the UCT formula and use the evolved expressions in MCTS. More specifically, we evolve expressions by means of our proposed Semantic-inspired Evolutionary Algorithm in MCTS approach (SIEA-MCTS). This is inspired by semantics in Genetic Programming (GP), where the use of fitness cases is seen as a requirement to be adopted in GP. Fitness cases are normally used to determine the fitness of individuals and can be used to compute the semantic similarity (or dissimilarity) of individuals. However, fitness cases are not available in MCTS. We extend this notion by using multiple reward values from MCTS that allow us to determine both the fitness of an individual and its semantics. By doing so, we show how SIEA-MCTS is able to successfully evolve mathematical expressions that yield better or competitive results compared to UCT without the need of tuning these evolved expressions. We compare the performance of the proposed SIEA-MCTS against MCTS algorithms, MCTS Rapid Action Value Estimation algorithms, three variants of the *-minimax family of algorithms, a random controller and two more EA approaches. We consistently show how SIEA-MCTS outperforms most of these intelligent controllers in the challenging game of Carcassonne.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.