CSCE 580 Artificial Intelligence Ch.6: Adversarial Search - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

About This Presentation
Title:

CSCE 580 Artificial Intelligence Ch.6: Adversarial Search

Description:

E.g., 2-ply (=1-move) game: UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA ... 4-ply lookahead is a hopeless chess player! 4-ply human novice. 8-ply typical PC, human master. 12 ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:615
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 32
Provided by: MarcoVa
Learn more at: https://cse.sc.edu
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: CSCE 580 Artificial Intelligence Ch.6: Adversarial Search


1
CSCE 580Artificial IntelligenceCh.6
Adversarial Search
  • Fall 2008
  • Marco Valtorta
  • mgv_at_cse.sc.edu

2
Acknowledgment
  • The slides are based on the textbook AIMA and
    other sources, including other fine textbooks and
    the accompanying slide sets
  • The other textbooks I considered are
  • David Poole, Alan Mackworth, and Randy Goebel.
    Computational Intelligence A Logical Approach.
    Oxford, 1998
  • A second edition (by Poole and Mackworth) is
    under development. Dr. Poole allowed us to use a
    draft of it in this course
  • Ivan Bratko. Prolog Programming for Artificial
    Intelligence, Third Edition. Addison-Wesley,
    2001
  • The fourth edition is under development
  • George F. Luger. Artificial Intelligence
    Structures and Strategies for Complex Problem
    Solving, Sixth Edition. Addison-Welsey, 2009

3
Outline
  • Optimal decisions
  • a-ß pruning
  • Imperfect, real-time decisions

4
Games vs. search problems
  • "Unpredictable" opponent ? specifying a move for
    every possible opponent reply
  • Time limits ? unlikely to find goal, must
    approximate

5
Game tree (2-player, deterministic, turns)
6
Minimax
  • Perfect play for deterministic games
  • Idea choose move to position with highest
    minimax value best achievable payoff against
    optimal play
  • E.g., 2-ply (1-move) game

7
Minimax algorithm
8
Properties of minimax
  • Complete? Yes (if tree is finite)
  • Optimal? Yes (against an optimal opponent)
  • Time complexity? O(bm)
  • Space complexity? O(bm) (depth-first exploration)
  • (O(m) if successors are generated
    one-at-a-time, as in backtracking)
  • For chess, b 35, m 100 for reasonable
    games? exact solution completely infeasible

9
a-ß pruning example
10
a-ß pruning example
11
a-ß pruning example
12
a-ß pruning example
13
a-ß pruning example
14
Alpha-Beta Example Using Intervals
Do DF-search until first leaf
Range of possible values
-8,8
-8, 8
15
Alpha-Beta Example (continued)
-8,8
-8,3
16
Alpha-Beta Example (continued)
-8,8
-8,3
17
Alpha-Beta Example (continued)
3,8
3,3
18
Alpha-Beta Example (continued)
3,8
This node is worse for MAX
-8,2
3,3
19
Alpha-Beta Example (continued)
,
3,14
-8,2
3,3
-8,14
20
Alpha-Beta Example (continued)
,
3,5
-8,2
3,3
-8,5
21
Alpha-Beta Example (continued)
3,3
2,2
-8,2
3,3
22
Alpha-Beta Example (continued)
3,3
2,2
-8,2
3,3
23
Properties of a-ß
  • Pruning does not affect final result
  • Good move ordering improves effectiveness of
    pruning
  • With "perfect ordering," time complexity
    O(bm/2)
  • ? doubles depth of search
  • A simple example of the value of reasoning about
    which computations are relevant (a form of
    metareasoning)

24
Why is it called a-ß?
  • a is the value of the best (i.e., highest-value)
    choice found so far at any choice point along the
    path for max
  • If v is worse than a, max will avoid it
  • ? prune that branch
  • Define ß similarly for min

25
The a-ß algorithm
26
The a-ß algorithm
27
Resource limits
  • Suppose we have 100 secs, explore 104 nodes/sec?
    106 nodes per move
  • Standard approach
  • cutoff test
  • e.g., depth limit (perhaps add quiescence search)
  • evaluation function
  • estimated desirability of position

28
Evaluation functions
  • For chess, typically linear weighted sum of
    features
  • Eval(s) w1 f1(s) w2 f2(s) wn fn(s)
  • e.g., w1 9 with
  • f1(s) (number of white queens) (number of
    black queens), etc.

29
Cutting off search
  • MinimaxCutoff is identical to MinimaxValue except
  • Terminal? is replaced by Cutoff?
  • Utility is replaced by Eval
  • Does it work in practice?
  • bm 106, b35 ? m4
  • 4-ply lookahead is a hopeless chess player!
  • 4-ply human novice
  • 8-ply typical PC, human master
  • 12-ply Deep Blue, Kasparov

30
Deterministic games in practice
  • Checkers Chinook ended 40-year-reign of human
    world champion Marion Tinsley in 1994. Used a
    precomputed endgame database defining perfect
    play for all positions involving 8 or fewer
    pieces on the board, a total of 444 billion
    positions
  • Jonathan Schaeffer at the department of CS of the
    University of Alberta showed that checkers is a
    forced draw perfect players cannot defeat each
    other (http//www.cs.ualberta.ca/chinook/)
  • Chess Deep Blue defeated human world champion
    Garry Kasparov in a six-game match in 1997. Deep
    Blue searches 200 million positions per second,
    uses very sophisticated evaluation, and
    undisclosed methods for extending some lines of
    search up to 40 ply
  • Othello human champions refuse to compete
    against computers, who are too good
  • Go human champions refuse to compete against
    computers, who are too bad. In go, b gt 300, so
    most programs use pattern knowledge bases to
    suggest plausible moves

31
Summary
  • Games are fun to work on!
  • They illustrate several important points about AI
  • perfection is unattainable ? must approximate
  • good idea to think about what to think about
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com