Solving combinatorial games has been a classic research topic in artificial intelligence because solutions can offer essential information to improve gameplay. Several definitions exist for `solving the game,' but they are markedly different regarding computational cost and the detail of insights derived. In this study, we introduce a novel definition called `semi-strongly solved' and propose an algorithm to achieve this type of solution efficiently. This new definition addresses existing gaps because of its intermediate computational cost and the quality of the solution. To demonstrate the potential of our approach, we derive the theoretical computational complexity of our algorithm under a simple condition, and apply it to semi-strongly solve the game of 6x6 Othello. This study raises many new research goals in this research area.

Search algorithms are often categorized by their node expansion strategy. One option is the depth-first strategy, a simple backtracking strategy that traverses the search space in the order in which successor nodes are generated. An alternative is the best-first strategy, which was designed to make it possible to use domain-specific heuristic information. By exploring promising parts of the search space first, best-first algorithms are usually more efficient than depth-first algorithms. In programs that play minimax games such as chess and checkers, the efficiency of the search is of crucial importance. Given the success of best-first algorithms in other domains, one would expect them to be used for minimax games too. However, all high-performance game-playing programs are based on a depth-first algorithm. This study takes a closer look at a depth-first algorithm, AB, and a best-first algorithm, SSS. The prevailing opinion on these algorithms is that SSS offers the potential for a more efficient search, but that its complicated formulation and exponential memory requirements render it impractical. The theoretical part of this work shows that there is a surprisingly straightforward link between the two algorithms -- for all practical purposes, SSS is a special case of AB. Subsequent empirical evidence proves the prevailing opinion on SSS to be wrong: it is not a complicated algorithm, it does not need too much memory, and it is also not more efficient than depth-first search.

Dept. of Computer Science, Carnegie-Mellon University. "Many game-playing programs must search very large game trees. Use of the alpha-beta pruning algorithm instead of the simple minimax search reduces by a large factor the number of bottom positions which must be examined in the search. An analytical expression for the expected number of bottom positions examined in a game tree using alpha-beta pruning is derived, subject to the assumptions that the branching factor N and the depth D of the tree are arbitrary but fixed, and the bottom positions are a random permutation of ND unique values. A simple approximation to the growth rate of the expected number of bottom positions examined is suggested, based on a Monte Carlo simulation for large values of N and D. The behavior of the model is compared with the behavior of the alpha-beta algorithm in a chess playing program and the effects of correlation and non-unique bottom position values in real game trees are examined."