Monte-Carlo Planning: Theoretically Fast Convergence Meets Practical Efficiency
Zohar Feldman; Carmel Domshlak · 2013 · arXiv
WASTE classifies this as Negative / Null Result Report · AI classification, approximate
The study found no significant effect — useful as a negative control or null benchmark for your own design.
Abstract (excerpt)
Popular Monte-Carlo tree search (MCTS) algorithms for online planning, such as epsilon-greedy tree search and UCT, aim at rapidly identifying a reasonably good action, but provide rather poor worst-case guarantees on performance improvement over time. In contrast, a recently introduced MCTS algorithm BRUE guarantees exponential-rate improvement over time, yet it is not geared towards identifying reasonably good choices right at the go. We take a stand on the individual strengths of these two classes of algorithms, and show how they can be effectively connected. We then rationalize a principle
Excerpt shown for reference under fair use — read the full paper at the publisher.
About to run something similar?
Run an AI Precheck on your own design to catch failure modes like this one before you spend the time. Your first desk check is free.
Related failures
Leakage and the reproducibility crisis in machine-learning-based science
Negative / Null Result ReportDefining and detecting quantum speedup
Negative / Null Result ReportService robots in hotels: understanding the service quality perceptions of human-robot interaction
Negative / Null Result ReportBoosting methods for multi-class imbalanced data classification: an experimental review
Negative / Null Result ReportFINANCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND ECONOMIC GROWTH: A META‐ANALYSIS
Negative / Null Result ReportThe impact of site-specific digital histology signatures on deep learning model accuracy and bias
WASTE indexes this work — it does not host or republish it. Failure-type classification is automated and approximate.
Metadata source: arXiv