PreprintCited by 200Artificial Intelligence in GamesReinforcement Learning in RoboticsAI-based Problem Solving and Planning

Thinking Fast and Slow with Deep Learning and Tree Search

Open access
Anthony, Thomas, Tian, Zheng, Barber, David·2017·arXiv

Abstract

Sequential decision making problems, such as structured prediction, robotic control, and game playing, require a combination of planning policies and generalisation of those plans. In this paper, we present Expert Iteration (ExIt), a novel reinforcement learning algorithm which decomposes the problem into separate planning and generalisation tasks. Planning new policies is performed by tree search, while a deep neural network generalises those plans. Subsequently, tree search is improved by using the neural network policy to guide search, increasing the strength of new plans. In contrast, standard deep Reinforcement Learning algorithms rely on a neural network not only to generalise plans, but to discover them too. We show that ExIt outperforms REINFORCE for training a neural network to play the board game Hex, and our final tree search agent, trained tabula rasa, defeats MoHex 1.0, the most recent Olympiad Champion player to be publicly released.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1705.08439

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Generational methods that exist explicitly optimise new generations with hand-crafted and explicit imitation learning techniques, as opposed to learning accumulation implicitly.

    “Generational methods that do exist, such as iterated policy distillation [Schmitt et al., 2018, Stooke et al., 2022] and expert iteration [Anthony et al., 2017], explicitly optimise new generations with hand-crafted and explicit imitation learning techniques, as opposed to learning accumulation implicitly, which should ultimately enable greater flexibility.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [11][11] X. Guo, S. Singh, H. Lee, R. L. Lewis, and X. Wang. Deep Learning for Real-Time Atari Game Play Using Offline Monte-Carlo Rree Search Planning. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , pages 3338-3346, 2014. -
  2. [15][15] S. Ross and J. A. Bagnell. Reinforcement and Imitation Learning via Interactive No-Regret Learning. ArXiv e-prints , 2014. -

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Anthony, T., Tian, Z., & Barber, D.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2017
Volume
30
Pages
5360-5370
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2618097077
Cited by
198
References
15
Citations by year
2025: 6 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 39 · 2019: 36 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 2
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence in Games
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
Keywords
tree search, deep reinforcement learning, sequential decision making, Hex, structured prediction, game-playing agents

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review