CC511 Artificial Intelligence

Game-Playing & Adversarial Search

Dr. Karma Fathalla
 Overview

• Minimax Search with Perfect Decisions

– Impractical in most cases, but theoretical basis for analysis

• Minimax Search with Cut-off

– Replace terminal leaf utility by heuristic evaluation function

• Alpha-Beta Pruning
– The fact of the adversary leads to an advantage in search!
 Types of Games

battleship
Kriegspiel

Not Considered: Physical games like tennis, croquet,

ice hockey, etc.
(but see “robot soccer” http://www.robocup.org/)
 Typical assumptions

• Two agents whose actions alternate

• Utility values for each agent are the opposite of the other
– This creates the adversarial situation

• Fully observable environments

• In game theory terms:

– “Deterministic, turn-taking, zero-sum games of perfect information”

• Generalizes to stochastic games, multiple players, non zero-sum, etc.

 Game tree (2-player, deterministic, turns)

How do we search this tree to find the optimal move?

 Search versus Games

• Search – no adversary
– Solution is (heuristic) method for finding goal
– Heuristics and CSP techniques can find optimal solution
– Evaluation function: estimate of cost from start to goal through given node
– Examples: path planning, scheduling activities

• Games – adversary
– Solution is strategy
• strategy specifies move for every possible opponent reply.
– Time limits force an approximate solution
– Evaluation function: evaluate “goodness” of game position
– Examples: chess, checkers, Othello, backgammon
 Games as Search

• Two players: MAX and MIN

• MAX moves first and they take turns until the game is over
– Winner gets reward, loser gets penalty.
– “Zero sum” means the sum of the reward and the penalty is a constant.

• Formal definition as a search problem:

– Initial state: Set-up specified by the rules, e.g., initial board configuration of chess.
– Player(s): Defines which player has the move in a state.
– Actions(s): Returns the set of legal moves in a state.
– Result(s,a): Transition model defines the result of a move.
– (2nd ed.: Successor function: list of (move,state) pairs specifying legal moves.)
– Terminal-Test(s): Is the game finished? True if finished, false otherwise.
– Utility function(s,p): Gives numerical value of terminal state s for player p.
• E.g., win (+1), lose (-1), and draw (0) in tic-tac-toe.
• E.g., win (+1), lose (0), and draw (1/2) in chess.

• MAX uses search tree to determine next move.

 An optimal procedure: The Min-Max method

Designed to find the optimal strategy for Max and find best move:

• 1. Generate the whole game tree, down to the leaves.

• 2. Apply utility (payoff) function to each leaf.

• 3. Back-up values from leaves through branch nodes:

– a Max node computes the Max of its child values
– a Min node computes the Min of its child values

• 4. At root: choose the move leading to the child of highest value.

Game Trees
Two-Ply Game Tree
Two-Ply Game Tree
 Two-Ply Game Tree

Minimax maximizes the utility for the worst-case outcome for max

The minimax decision

 Pseudocode for Minimax Algorithm

function MINIMAX-DECISION(state) returns an action

inputs: state, current state in game
return arg maxaACTIONS(state) MIN-VALUE(Result(state,a))

function MAX-VALUE(state) returns a utility value

if TERMINAL-TEST(state) then return UTILITY(state)
v  −∞
for a in ACTIONS(state) do
v  MAX(v,MIN-VALUE(Result(state,a)))
return v
function MIN-VALUE(state) returns a utility value
if TERMINAL-TEST(state) then return UTILITY(state)
v  +∞
for a in ACTIONS(state) do
v  MIN(v,MAX-VALUE(Result(state,a)))
return v
 Properties of minimax

• Complete?
– Yes (if tree is finite).

• Optimal?
– Yes (against an optimal opponent).
– Can it be beaten by an opponent playing sub-optimally?
• No.

• Time complexity?
– O(bm)

• Space complexity?
– O(bm) (depth-first search, generate all actions at once)
 Game Tree Size

• Tic-Tac-Toe
– b ≈ 5 legal actions per state on average, total of 9 plies in game.
• “ply” = one action by one player, “move” = two plies.
– 59 = 1,953,125
– 9! = 362,880 (Computer goes first)
– 8! = 40,320 (Computer goes second)
 exact solution quite reasonable

• Chess
– b ≈ 35 (approximate average branching factor)
– d ≈ 100 (depth of game tree for “typical” game)
– bd ≈ 35100 ≈ 10154 nodes!!
 exact solution completely infeasible

• It is usually impossible to develop the whole search tree.

 (Static) Heuristic Evaluation Functions

• An Evaluation Function:
– Estimates how good the current board configuration is for a player.
– Typically, evaluate how good it is for the player, how good it is for
the opponent, then subtract the opponent’s score from the player’s.
– Often called “static” because it is called on a static board position.
– Othello: Number of white pieces - Number of black pieces
– Chess: Value of all white pieces - Value of all black pieces

• Typical values from -infinity (loss) to +infinity (win) or [-1, +1].

• If the board evaluation is X for a player, it’s -X for the opponent

– “Zero-sum game”
 Applying MiniMax to tic-tac-toe

• The static heuristic evaluation function

Backup Values
 Alpha-Beta Pruning
Exploiting the Fact of an Adversary

• If a position is provably bad:

– It is NO USE expending search time to find out exactly how bad

• If the adversary can force a bad position:

– It is NO USE expending search time to find out the good positions
that the adversary won’t let you achieve anyway

• Bad = not better than we already know we can achieve elsewhere.

• Contrast normal search:

– ANY node might be a winner.
– ALL nodes must be considered.
– (A* avoids this through knowledge, i.e., heuristics)
Tic-Tac-Toe Example with Alpha-Beta Pruning

Backup Values
 Another Alpha-Beta Example

Do DF-search until first leaf

Range of possible values

(−∞,+∞)

(−∞, +∞)
Alpha-Beta Example (continued)

(−∞,+∞)

(−∞,3]
Alpha-Beta Example (continued)

(−∞,+∞)

(−∞,3]
Alpha-Beta Example (continued)

[3,+∞)

[3, + ∞]
Alpha-Beta Example (continued)

[3,+∞)
This node is
worse for MAX
(3, +∞]
[3,3] (3,2]
Alpha-Beta Example (continued)

[3,+∞] ,

[−∞,3] (−∞,2] (−∞,14]

 Alpha-Beta Example (continued)

[3,+∞] ,

[−∞,3] (−∞,2] (−∞,5]

 Alpha-Beta Example (continued)

[3,3]

[−∞,3] (−∞,2] [−∞,2]

 Alpha-Beta Example (continued)

[3,2]

[3,3] (3,2] [3,2]

 General alpha-beta pruning

• Consider a node n in the tree ---

• If player has a better choice at:

– Parent node of n
– Or any choice point further up

• Then n will never be reached in play.

• Hence, when that much is known

about n, it can be pruned.
 Alpha-beta Algorithm

• Depth first search

– only considers nodes along a single path from root at any time

a = highest-value choice found at any choice point of path for MAX

(initially, a = −infinity)
b = lowest-value choice found at any choice point of path for MIN
(initially, b = +infinity)

• Pass current values of a and b down to child nodes during search.

• Update values of a and b during search:
– MAX updates a at MAX nodes
– MIN updates b at MIN nodes
• Prune remaining branches at a node when a ≥ b
 When to Prune

• Prune whenever a ≥ b.

– Prune below a Max node whose alpha value becomes greater than
or equal to the beta value of its ancestors.
• Max nodes update alpha based on children’s returned values.

– Prune below a Min node whose beta value becomes less than or
equal to the alpha value of its ancestors.
• Min nodes update beta based on children’s returned values.
 Pseudocode for Alpha-Beta Algorithm

function ALPHA-BETA-SEARCH(state) returns an action

inputs: state, current state in game
vMAX-VALUE(state, - ∞ , +∞)
return the action in SUCCESSORS(state) with value v
 Pseudocode for Alpha-Beta Algorithm

function ALPHA-BETA-SEARCH(state) returns an action

inputs: state, current state in game
vMAX-VALUE(state, - ∞ , +∞)
return the action in ACTIONS(state) with value v

function MAX-VALUE(state,a , b) returns a utility value

if TERMINAL-TEST(state) then return UTILITY(state)
v-∞
for a in ACTIONS(state) do
v  MAX(v,MIN-VALUE(Result(s,a), a , b))
if v ≥ b then return v
a  MAX(a ,v)
return v

(MIN-VALUE is defined analogously)

 Alpha-Beta Example Revisited

Do DF-search until first leaf

a, b, initial values
a=−
b =+

a, b, passed to kids

a=−
b =+
 Alpha-Beta Example (continued)

a=−
b =+

a=−
b =3
MIN updates b, based on kids
 Alpha-Beta Example (continued)

a=−
b =+

a=−
b =3
MIN updates b, based on kids.
No change.
Alpha-Beta Example (continued)

MAX updates a, based on kids.

a=3
b =+

3 is returned
as node value.
Alpha-Beta Example (continued)

a=3
b =+
a, b, passed to kids
a=3
b =+
Alpha-Beta Example (continued)

a=3
b =+
MIN updates b,
based on kids.
a=3
b =2
Alpha-Beta Example (continued)

a=3
b =+

a=3 a ≥ b,
b =2 so prune.
Alpha-Beta Example (continued)

MAX updates a, based on kids.

No change. a=3
b =+
2 is returned
as node value.
Alpha-Beta Example (continued)

a=3
b =+ ,
a, b, passed to kids

a=3
b =+
Alpha-Beta Example (continued)

a=3
b =+ ,
MIN updates b,
based on kids.
a=3
b =14
Alpha-Beta Example (continued)

a=3
b =+ ,
MIN updates b,
based on kids.
a=3
b =5
Alpha-Beta Example (continued)

a=3
2 is returned
b =+ as node value.

2
Alpha-Beta Example (continued)

Max calculates the

same node value, and
makes the same move!

2
 Effectiveness of Alpha-Beta Search

• Worst-Case
– branches are ordered so that no pruning takes place. In this case
alpha-beta gives no improvement over exhaustive search

• Best-Case
– each player’s best move is the left-most child (i.e., evaluated first)
– in practice, performance is closer to best rather than worst-case
– E.g., sort moves
– E.g., run Iterative Deepening search, sort by value last iteration.

• In practice often get O(b(d/2)) rather than O(bd)

– this is the same as having a branching factor of sqrt(b),
• (sqrt(b))d = b(d/2),i.e., we effectively go from b to square root of b
– e.g., in chess go from b ~ 35 to b ~ 6
• this permits much deeper search in the same amount of time
 Final Comments about Alpha-Beta Pruning

• Pruning does not affect final results

• Entire subtrees can be pruned.

• Good move ordering improves effectiveness of pruning

• Repeated states are again possible.

– Store them in memory = transposition table
 Example

-which nodes can be pruned?

5 6
3 4 1 2 7 8
 Answer to Example

-which nodes can be pruned?

Max

Min

Max

5 6
3 4 1 2 7 8
Answer: NONE! Because the most favorable nodes for both are
explored last (i.e., in the diagram, are on the right-hand side).
 Second Example
(the exact mirror image of the first example)

-which nodes can be pruned?

3 4
6 5 8 7 2 1
 Answer to Second Example
(the exact mirror image of the first example)

-which nodes can be pruned?

Max

Min

Max

3 4
6 5 8 7 2 1
Answer: LOTS! Because the most favorable nodes for both are
explored first (i.e., in the diagram, are on the left-hand side).
 Summary
• Game playing is best modeled as a search problem

• Game trees represent alternate computer/opponent moves

• Evaluation functions estimate the quality of a given board configuration

for the Max player.

• Minimax is a procedure which chooses moves by assuming that the

opponent will always choose the move which is best for them

• Alpha-Beta is a procedure which can prune large parts of the search

tree and allow search to go deeper

• For many well-known games, computer algorithms based on heuristic

search match or out-perform human world experts.