mgame培训讲义.pptVIP

Adversarial Search Chapter 6 Section 1 – 4 Outline Optimal decisions α-β pruning Imperfect, real-time decisions Games vs. search problems Unpredictable opponent ? specifying a move for every possible opponent reply Time limits ? unlikely to find goal, must approximate Game tree (2-player, deterministic, turns) Minimax Perfect play for deterministic games Idea: choose move to position with highest minimax value  = best achievable payoff against best play E.g., 2-ply game: Minimax algorithm 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) For chess, b ≈ 35, m ≈100 for reasonable games? exact solution completely infeasible α-β pruning example α-β pruning example α-β pruning example α-β pruning example α-β pruning example Properties of α-β 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) Why is it called α-β? α 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 α, max will avoid it ? prune that branch Define β similarly for min The α-β algorithm The α-β algorithm 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 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. Cutting off search MinimaxCutoff is identical to MinimaxValue except Terminal? is replaced by Cutoff? Utility is replaced by Eval Does i