Abstract

Local, spatial state-action features can be used to effectively train linear policies from self-play in a wide variety of board games. Such policies can play games directly, or be used to bias tree search agents. However, the resulting feature sets can be large, with a significant amount of overlap and redundancies between features. This is a problem for two reasons. Firstly, large feature sets can be computationally expensive, which reduces the playing strength of agents based on them. Secondly, redundancies and correlations between features impair the ability for humans to analyse, interpret, or understand tactics learned by the policies. We look towards decision trees for their ability to perform feature selection, and serve as interpretable models. Previous work on distilling policies into decision trees uses states as inputs, and distributions over the complete action space as outputs. In contrast, we propose and evaluate a variety of decision tree types, which take state-action pairs as inputs, and provide various different types of outputs on a per-action basis. An empirical evaluation over 43 different board games is presented, and two of those games are used as case studies where we attempt to interpret the discovered features.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.