paper-0036 · paper · 1995
Gerald Tesauro
Self-play RL reaches expert backgammon; the proof of concept for everything later.
Abstract
Ever since the days of Shannon's proposal for a chess-playing algorithm [12] and Samuel's checkers-learning program [10] the domain of complex board games such as Go, chess, checkers, Othello, and backgammon has been widely regarded as an ideal testing ground for exploring a variety of concepts and approaches in artificial intelligence and machine learning. Such board games offer the challenge of tremendous complexity and sophistication required to play at expert level. At the same time, the problem inputs and performance measures are clear-cut and well defined, and the game environment is readily automated in that it is easy to simulate the board, the rules of legal play, and the rules regarding when the game is over and determining the outcome. [OpenAlex]
Academic, score -0.1717
| Metric | Status | Value | Norm. | Weight | Contribution | Source | Confidence | License | Provenance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| citation_count | present | 1485.0 | 0.00668 | 0.5 | 0.00334 | OpenAlex | high | OpenAlex, CC0 metadata | link |
| library_holdings | missing | recorded as missing, penalized by rule, never imputed | −0.1 | recorded as missing; penalized by rule, never imputed | |||||
| readership_persistence | present | 15.0 | 1.0 | 0.05 | 0.05 | OpenAlex | medium | OpenAlex, CC0 metadata | link |
| syllabus_adoptions | missing | recorded as missing, penalized by rule, never imputed | −0.125 | recorded as missing; penalized by rule, never imputed | |||||
Broad Influence, score 0.2013
| Metric | Status | Value | Norm. | Weight | Contribution | Source | Confidence | License | Provenance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| citation_count | present | 1485.0 | 0.00668 | 0.2 | 0.001336 | OpenAlex | high | OpenAlex, CC0 metadata | link |
| library_holdings | missing | recorded as missing, penalized by rule, never imputed | −0.125 | recorded as missing; penalized by rule, never imputed | |||||
| readership_persistence | present | 15.0 | 1.0 | 0.4 | 0.4 | OpenAlex | medium | OpenAlex, CC0 metadata | link |
| syllabus_adoptions | missing | recorded as missing, penalized by rule, never imputed | −0.075 | recorded as missing; penalized by rule, never imputed | |||||
Governance Practitioner, score -0.2233
| Metric | Status | Value | Norm. | Weight | Contribution | Source | Confidence | License | Provenance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| citation_count | present | 1485.0 | 0.00668 | 0.25 | 0.00167 | OpenAlex | high | OpenAlex, CC0 metadata | link |
| library_holdings | missing | recorded as missing, penalized by rule, never imputed | −0.15 | recorded as missing; penalized by rule, never imputed | |||||
| readership_persistence | present | 15.0 | 1.0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | OpenAlex | medium | OpenAlex, CC0 metadata | link |
| syllabus_adoptions | missing | recorded as missing, penalized by rule, never imputed | −0.175 | recorded as missing; penalized by rule, never imputed | |||||
A rank is not a verdict on intrinsic worth. It is a transparent output of declared evidence, weights, and missing-data rules at a specific release date.
Disagree with this rank or a number? Challenge it with your evidence. Every challenge gets a public identifier and a published resolution.