This paper introduces deep synoptic Monte Carlo planning (DSMCP) for large imperfect information games.

This paper introduces deep synoptic Monte Carlo planning (DSMCP) for large imperfect information games. The algorithm constructs a belief state with an unweighted particle filter and plans via playouts that start at samples drawn from the belief state.

The synopsis features were hand-designed. Many of them are natural given the rules of chess. These tables also include saliency estimates averaged over five runs. However, it performed very poorly in that competition, winning fewer games than the random bot. The program and underlying algorithm presented in this paper are largely the same as the originals.

DSMCP is the basis of the program Penumbra, which won the official 2020 reconnaissance blind chess competition versus 33 other programs. This paper also evaluates algorithm variants that incorporate caution, paranoia, and a novel bandit algorithm. Furthermore, it audits the synopsis features used in Penumbra with per-bit saliency statistics.

In imperfect information games, the game state is generally not fully observable to players. Therefore, good gameplay requires policies that deal with the different information that is hidden from each player. To combat this, effective algorithms often reason about information sets; the sets of all possible game states that are consistent with a player's observations. While there is no way to distinguish between the states within an information set, this property does not imply that all states are equally likely to occur in play. We extend previous research on assigning weights to the states in an information set in order to facilitate better gameplay in the imperfect information game of Reconnaissance Blind Chess. For this, we train two different neural networks which estimate the likelihood of each state in an information set from historical game data. Experimentally, we find that a Siamese neural network is able to achieve higher accuracy and is more efficient than a classical convolutional neural network for the given domain. Finally, we evaluate an RBC-playing agent that is based on the generated weightings and compare different parameter settings that influence how strongly it should rely on them. The resulting best player is ranked 5th on the public leaderboard.

In imperfect information games, the evaluation of a game state not only depends on the observable world but also relies on hidden parts of the environment. As accessing the obstructed information trivialises state evaluations, one approach to tackle such problems is to estimate the value of the imperfect state as a combination of all states in the information set, i.e., all possible states that are consistent with the current imperfect information. In this work, the goal is to learn a function that maps from the imperfect game information state to its expected value. However, constructing a perfect training set, i.e. an enumeration of the whole information set for numerous imperfect states, is often infeasible. To compute the expected values for an imperfect information game like \textit{Reconnaissance Blind Chess}, one would need to evaluate thousands of chess positions just to obtain the training target for a single state. Still, the expected value of a state can already be approximated with appropriate accuracy from a much smaller set of evaluations. Thus, in this paper, we empirically investigate how a budget of perfect information game evaluations should be distributed among training samples to maximise the return. Our results show that sampling a small number of states, in our experiments roughly 3, for a larger number of separate positions is preferable over repeatedly sampling a smaller quantity of states. Thus, we find that in our case, the quantity of different samples seems to be more important than higher target quality.

In this work, we adapt a training approach inspired by the original AlphaGo system to play the imperfect information game of Reconnaissance Blind Chess. Using only the observations instead of a full description of the game state, we first train a supervised agent on publicly available game records. Next, we increase the performance of the agent through self-play with the on-policy reinforcement learning algorithm Proximal Policy Optimization. We do not use any search to avoid problems caused by the partial observability of game states and only use the policy network to generate moves when playing. With this approach, we achieve an ELO of 1330 on the RBC leaderboard, which places our agent at position 27 at the time of this writing. We see that self-play significantly improves performance and that the agent plays acceptably well without search and without making assumptions about the true game state.

Partially Observable Markov Decision Process (POMDP) is a framework applicable to many real world problems. In this work, we propose an approach to solve POMDPs with multimodal belief by relying on a policy that solves the fully observable version. By defininig a new, mixture value function based on the value function from the fully observable variant, we can use the corresponding greedy policy to solve the POMDP itself. We develop the mathematical framework necessary for discussion, and introduce a benchmark built on the task of Reconnaissance Blind TicTacToe. On this benchmark, we show that our policy outperforms policies ignoring the existence of multiple modes.

This paper provides a complexity analysis for the game of reconnaissance blind chess (RBC), a recently-introduced variant of chess where each player does not know the positions of the opponent's pieces a priori but may reveal a subset of them through chosen, private sensing actions. In contrast to commonly studied imperfect information games like poker and Kriegspiel, an RBC player does not know what the opponent knows or has chosen to learn, exponentially expanding the size of the game's information sets (i.e., the number of possible game states that are consistent with what a player has observed). Effective RBC sensing and moving strategies must account for the uncertainty of both players, an essential element of many real-world decision-making problems. Here we evaluate RBC from a game theoretic perspective, tracking the proliferation of information sets from the perspective of selected canonical bot players in tournament play. We show that, even for effective sensing strategies, the game sizes of RBC compare to those of Go while the average size of a player's information set throughout an RBC game is much greater than that of a player in Heads-up Limit Hold 'Em. We compare these measures of complexity among different playing algorithms and provide cursory assessments of the various sensing and moving strategies.