CMSC 471

Game Playing
Chapter 6
Adapted from slides by Some material adopted from notes
Tim Finin and by Charles R. Dyer, University of
Marie desJardins. Wisconsin-Madison
 Outline
• Game playing
– State of the art and resources
– Framework
• Game trees
– Minimax
– Alpha-beta pruning
– Adding randomness
 Why study games?
• Clear criteria for success
• Offer an opportunity to study problems involving
{hostile, adversarial, competing} agents.
• Historical reasons
• Fun
• Interesting, hard problems which require minimal
“initial structure”
• Games often define very large search spaces
– chess 35100 nodes in search tree, 1040 legal states
 State of the art
• How good are computer game players?
– Chess:
• Deep Blue beat Gary Kasparov in 1997
• Garry Kasparav vs. Deep Junior (Feb 2003): tie!
• Kasparov vs. X3D Fritz (November 2003): tie!
http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/fun.games/11/19/kasparov.chess.ap/
– Checkers: Chinook (an AI program with a very large endgame database)
is(?) the world champion.
– Go: Computer players are decent, at best
– Bridge: “Expert-level” computer players exist (but no world champions
yet!)
• Good places to learn more:
– http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~games/
– http://www.cs.unimass.nl/icga
 Chinook
• Chinook is the World Man-Machine Checkers
Champion, developed by researchers at the University
of Alberta.
• It earned this title by competing in human tournaments,
winning the right to play for the (human) world
championship, and eventually defeating the best players
in the world.
• Visit http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~chinook/ to play a
version of Chinook over the Internet.
• The developers have fully analyzed the game of
checkers and have the complete game tree for it.
– Perfect play on both sides results in a tie.
• “One Jump Ahead: Challenging Human Supremacy in
Checkers” Jonathan Schaeffer, University of Alberta
(496 pages, Springer. $34.95, 1998).
Ratings of human and computer chess champions
 Typical case
• 2-person game
• Players alternate moves
• Zero-sum: one player’s loss is the other’s gain
• Perfect information: both players have access to complete
information about the state of the game. No information is
hidden from either player.
• No chance (e.g., using dice) involved
• Examples: Tic-Tac-Toe, Checkers, Chess, Go, Nim, Othello
• Not: Bridge, Solitaire, Backgammon, ...
 How to play a game
• A way to play such a game is to:
– Consider all the legal moves you can make
– Compute the new position resulting from each move
– Evaluate each resulting position and determine which is best
– Make that move
– Wait for your opponent to move and repeat
• Key problems are:
– Representing the “board”
– Generating all legal next boards
– Evaluating a position
 Evaluation function
• Evaluation function or static evaluator is used to evaluate
the “goodness” of a game position.
– Contrast with heuristic search where the evaluation function was a
non-negative estimate of the cost from the start node to a goal and
passing through the given node
• The zero-sum assumption allows us to use a single
evaluation function to describe the goodness of a board
with respect to both players.
– f(n) >> 0: position n good for me and bad for you
– f(n) << 0: position n bad for me and good for you
– f(n) near 0: position n is a neutral position
– f(n) = +infinity: win for me
– f(n) = -infinity: win for you
 Evaluation function examples
• Example of an evaluation function for Tic-Tac-Toe:
f(n) = [# of 3-lengths open for me] - [# of 3-lengths open for you]
where a 3-length is a complete row, column, or diagonal
• Alan Turing’s function for chess
– f(n) = w(n)/b(n) where w(n) = sum of the point value of white’s pieces and b(n) =
sum of black’s
• Most evaluation functions are specified as a weighted sum of position
features:
f(n) = w1*feat1(n) + w2*feat2(n) + ... + wn*featk(n)
• Example features for chess are piece count, piece placement, squares
controlled, etc.
• Deep Blue had over 8000 features in its evaluation function
 Game trees
• Problem spaces for typical games are
represented as trees
• Root node represents the current
board configuration; player must decide
the best single move to make next
• Static evaluator function rates a board
position. f(board) = real number with
f>0 “white” (me), f<0 for black (you)
• Arcs represent the possible legal moves for a player
• If it is my turn to move, then the root is labeled a "MAX" node;
otherwise it is labeled a "MIN" node, indicating my opponent's turn.
• Each level of the tree has nodes that are all MAX or all MIN; nodes at
level i are of the opposite kind from those at level i+1
 Minimax procedure
• Create start node as a MAX node with current board configuration
• Expand nodes down to some depth (a.k.a. ply) of lookahead in the
game
• Apply the evaluation function at each of the leaf nodes
• “Back up” values for each of the non-leaf nodes until a value is
computed for the root node
– At MIN nodes, the backed-up value is the minimum of the values associated
with its children.
– At MAX nodes, the backed-up value is the maximum of the values associated
with its children.
• Pick the operator associated with the child node whose backed-up
value determined the value at the root
 Minimax Algorithm
2

2 1 2 1

2 7 1 8 2 7 1 8 2 7 1 8

This is the move 2

Static evaluator selected by minimax
value
2 1
MAX
MIN 2 7 1 8
Partial Game Tree for Tic-Tac-Toe

• f(n) = +1 if the position is a

win for X.
• f(n) = -1 if the position is a
win for O.
• f(n) = 0 if the position is a
draw.
 Minimax Tree
MAX node

MIN node

value computed
f value by minimax
 Alpha-beta pruning
• We can improve on the performance of the minimax
algorithm through alpha-beta pruning
• Basic idea: “If you have an idea that is surely bad, don't
take the time to see how truly awful it is.” -- Pat Winston

MAX >=2 • We don’t need to compute

the value at this node.
MIN =2 <=1
• No matter what it is, it can’t
affect the value of the root
MAX node.
2 7 1 ?
 Alpha-beta pruning
• Traverse the search tree in depth-first order
• At each MAX node n, alpha(n) = maximum value found so
far
• At each MIN node n, beta(n) = minimum value found so far
– Note: The alpha values start at -infinity and only increase, while beta
values start at +infinity and only decrease.
• Beta cutoff: Given a MAX node n, cut off the search below n
(i.e., don’t generate or examine any more of n’s children) if
alpha(n) >= beta(i) for some MIN node ancestor i of n.
• Alpha cutoff: stop searching below MIN node n if beta(n) <=
alpha(i) for some MAX node ancestor i of n.
 Alpha-beta example
MAX 3

MIN 3 2 - prune 14 1 - prune

3 12 8 2 14 1
 Alpha-beta algorithm
function MAX-VALUE (state, α, β)
;; α = best MAX so far; β = best MIN
if TERMINAL-TEST (state) then return UTILITY(state)
v := -∞
for each s in SUCCESSORS (state) do
v := MAX (v, MIN-VALUE (s, α, β))
if v >= β then return v
α := MAX (α, v)
end
return v

function MIN-VALUE (state, α, β)

if TERMINAL-TEST (state) then return UTILITY(state)
v := ∞
for each s in SUCCESSORS (state) do
v := MIN (v, MAX-VALUE (s, α, β))
if v <= α then return v
β := MIN (β, v)
end
return v
 Effectiveness of alpha-beta
• Alpha-beta is guaranteed to compute the same value for the root
node as computed by minimax, with less or equal computation
• Worst case: no pruning, examining bd leaf nodes, where each
node has b children and a d-ply search is performed
• Best case: examine only (2b)d/2 leaf nodes.
– Result is you can search twice as deep as minimax!
• Best case is when each player’s best move is the first alternative
generated
• In Deep Blue, they found empirically that alpha-beta pruning
meant that the average branching factor at each node was about 6
instead of about 35!
 Games of chance
• Backgammon is a two-player
game with uncertainty.
•Players roll dice to determine
what moves to make.
•White has just rolled 5 and 6
and has four legal moves:
• 5-10, 5-11
•5-11, 19-24
•5-10, 10-16
•5-11, 11-16

•Such games are good for

exploring decision making in
adversarial problems involving
skill and luck.
 Game trees with chance nodes
• Chance nodes (shown as
circles) represent random events
• For a random event with N
outcomes, each chance node has
N distinct children; a probability
is associated with each
Min
• (For 2 dice, there are 21 distinct Rolls

outcomes)
• Use minimax to compute values
for MAX and MIN nodes
• Use expected values for chance Max
nodes Rolls

• For chance nodes over a max node,

as in C:

expectimax(C) = ∑i(P(di) * maxvalue(i))

• For chance nodes over a min node:

expectimin(C) = ∑ (P(d ) * minvalue(i))

 Meaning of the evaluation function

A1 is best A2 is best
move move

2 outcomes
with prob
{.9, .1}

• Dealing with probabilities and expected values means we have to be careful

about the “meaning” of values returned by the static evaluator.
• Note that a “relative-order preserving” change of the values would not change
the decision of minimax, but could change the decision with chance nodes.
• Linear transformations are OK