Abstract
Modern game programs have achieved spectacular success in many games, such as checkers, Othello, and chess. In contrast, games with hidden information, like poker and bridge, have a fundamentally different structure, and game-playing programs have not had as much success to date.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
D. Billings. Computer poker. Master’s thesis, University of Alberta, 1995.
D. Billings, D. Papp, J. Schaeffer, and D. Szafron. Opponent modeling in poker. In AAAI National Conference, pp 493–499, 1998.
D. Billings, L. Pena, J. Schaeffer, and D. Szafron. Using probabilistic knowledge and simulation to play poker. In AAAI National Conference, pp 697–703, 1999.
D. Billings, A. Davidson, J. Schaeffer, and D. Szafron. The challenge of poker. In Artificial Intelligence, 134(1–2), pp 201–240, 2002.
D. Koller and A. Pfeffer. Representations and solutions for game-theoretic problems. Artificial Intelligence, 94(1), pp 167–215, 1997.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2002 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Billings, D. (2002). Abstracting Imperfect Information Game Trees. In: Koenig, S., Holte, R.C. (eds) Abstraction, Reformulation, and Approximation. SARA 2002. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 2371. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45622-8_26
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45622-8_26
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-43941-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45622-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive