Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Computational Intelligence in Mind Games

  • Chapter
Challenges for Computational Intelligence

Part of the book series: Studies in Computational Intelligence ((SCI,volume 63))

Summary

The chapter considers recent achievements and perspectives of Computational Intelligence (CI) applied to mind games. Several notable examples of unguided, autonomous CI learning systems are presented and discussed. Based on advantages and limitations of existing approaches a list of challenging issues and open problems in the area of intelligent game playing is proposed and motivated.

It is generally concluded in the paper that the ultimate goal of CI in mind game research is the ability to mimic human approach to game playing in all its major aspects including learning methods (learning from scratch, multitask learning, unsupervised learning, pattern-based knowledge acquisition) as well as reasoning and decision making (efficient position estimation, abstraction and generalization of game features, autonomous development of evaluation functions, effective preordering of moves and selective, contextual search).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. I. Aleksander. Neural networks- evolutionary checkers. Nature, 402(6764):857, 1999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. T. Anantharaman and M. Campbell. Singular extensions: Adding selectivity to brute-force searching. Artificial Intelligence, 43:99-109, 1990.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. A. Arbiser. Towards the unification of intuitive and formal game concepts with applications to computer chess. In Proceedings of the Digital Games Research Conference 2005 (DIGRA’2005), Vancouver, B.C., Canada, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  4. L. Barone and L. While. An adaptive learning model for simplified poker using evolutionary algorithms. In Proceedings of the Congress of Evolutionary Computation (GECCO-1999), pages 153-160, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  5. L. Barone and L. While. Adaptive learning for poker. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pages 566-573, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  6. J. Baxter, A. Tridgell, and L. Weaver. Experiments in parameter learning using temporal differences. ICCA Journal, 21(2):84-99, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  7. J. Baxter, A. Tridgell, and L. Weaver. Knightcap: A chess program that learns by combining td(λ) with game-tree search. In Machine Learning, Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference (ICML ’98), pages 28-36, Madison Wisconsin, July 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  8. J. Baxter, A. Tridgell, and L. Weaver. Learning to play chess using temporal differences. Machine Learning, 40(3):243-263, 2000.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. D. Beal. A generalised quiescence search algorithm. Artificial Intelligence, 43:85-98, 1990.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. D. F. Beal and M. C. Smith. Learning piece values using temporal differences. ICCA Journal, 20(3):147-151, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  11. H. Berliner. The B* tree search algorithm: A best-first proof procedure. Artificial Intelligence, 12(1):23-40, 1979.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. D. Billings. Thoughts on RoShamBo. ICGA Journal, 23(1):3-8, 2000.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. D. Billings, A. Davidson, J. Schaeffer, and D. Szafron. The challenge of poker. Artificial Intelligence, 134:201-240, 2002.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. B. Bouzy and T. Cazenave. Computer Go: an AI oriented survey. Artificial Intelligence, 132(1):39-103, 2001.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. D. Bump. GNU Go. http://www.gnu.org/software/gnugo/gnugo.html, 1999.

  16. M. Buro. Probcut: An effective selective extension of the alpha-beta algorithm. ICCA Journal, 18(2):71-76, 1995.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. M. Buro. From simple features to sophisticated evaluation functions. In H. J. van den Herik and H. Iida, editors, Proceedings of Computers and Games Conference (CG98), volume 1558 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 126 -145, Springer, Berlin, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  18. M. Buro. Toward opening book learning. ICCA Journal, 22(2):98-102, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  19. M. Buro. Improving heuristic minimax search by supervised learning. Artificial Intelligence, 134:85-99, 2002.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. M. Campbell, A. J. Hoane Jr., and F.-h. Hsu. Deep Blue. Artificial Intelligence, 134:57-83, 2002.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. R. Caruana. Multitask learning. Machine Learning, 28:41-75, 1997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. K. Chellapilla and D. B. Fogel. Evolution, neural networks, games, and intelligence. Proceedings of the IEEE, 87(9):1471-1496, 1999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. K. Chellapilla and D. B. Fogel. Evolving neural networks to play checkers without relying on expert knowledge. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, 10(6):1382-1391, 1999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. K. Chellapilla and D. B. Fogel. Anaconda defeats Hoyle 6-0: A case study competing an evolved checkers program against commercially available software. In Congress on Evolutionary Computation, La Jolla, CA, USA, pages 857-863, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  25. K. Chellapilla and D. B. Fogel. Evolving a neural network to play checkers without human expertise. In N. Baba and L. C. Jain, editors, Computational Intelligence in Games, volume 62, pages 39-56. Springer Verlag, Berlin, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  26. P. Darwen and X. Yao. On evolving robust strategies for iterated prisoner’s dilemma. volume 956 of LNCS, pages 276-292. Springer, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  27. A. D. de Groot. Thought and Choice in Chess. Mouton Publishers, The Hague, 1965.

    Google Scholar 

  28. A. Einstein. Cosmic Religion, with Other Opinions and Aphorisms. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  29. M. Enzenberger. Evaluation in Go by a neural network using soft segmentation. In Advances in Computer Games: Many Games, Many Challenges: Proceedings of the International Conference on Advances in Computer Games (ACG-10), pages 97-108, Graz, Austria, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  30. S. Epstein. Identifying the right reasons: Learning to filter decision makers. In R. Greiner and D. Subramanian, editors, Proceedings of the AAAI 1994 Fall Symposium on Relevance, pages 68-71, New Orleans, 1994. AAAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  31. S. L. Epstein, J. Gelfand, and J. Lesniak. Pattern-based learning and spatially-oriented concept formation in a multi-agent, decision-making expert. Computational Intelligence, 12(1):199-221, 1996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. T. E. Fawcett and P. E. Utgoff. Automatic feature generation for problem solving systems. In D. Sleeman and P. Edwards, editors, Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 144-153. Morgan Kaufmann, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  33. D. B. Fogel. Blondie24: Playing at the Edge of Artificial Intelligence. Morgan Kaufmann, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  34. D. B. Fogel, T. J. Hays, S. L. Hahn, and J. Quon. A self-learning evolutionary chess program. Proceedings of the IEEE, 92(12):1947-1954, 2004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. J. FĂŒrnkranz. Machine learning in computer chess: the next generation. ICGA Journal, 19(3):147-161, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  36. M. Gherrity. A game-learning machine. PhD Thesis, University of California, San Diego, CA, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  37. M. L. Ginsberg. GIB Library. http://www.cirl.uoregon.edu/ginsberg/gibresearch.html.

  38. M. L. Ginsberg. GIB: Steps toward an expert-level bridge-playing program. In International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’99), pages 584-589, Stockholm, SWEDEN, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  39. M. L. Ginsberg. GIB: Imperfect information in a computationally challenging game. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 14:303-358, 2001.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  40. H. Givens. PokerProbot. http://www.pokerprobot.com/, 2006.

  41. D. Gomboc, T. A. Marsland, and M. Buro. Evaluation function tuning via ordinal correlation. In Advances in Computer Games: Many Games, Many Challenges: Proceedings of the International Conference on Advances in Computer Games (ACG-10), pages 1-18, Graz, Austria, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  42. J. Gould and R. Levinson. Experience-based adaptive search. In R. Michalski and G. Tecuci, editors, Machine Learning: A Multi-Strategy Approach, pages 579-604. Morgan Kaufmann, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  43. K. Greer. Computer chess move-ordering schemes using move influence. Artificial Intelligence, 120:235-250, 2000.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  44. E. A. Heinz. Adaptive null-move pruning. ICCA Journal, 22(3):123-132,1999.

    Google Scholar 

  45. F.-h. Hsu. Behind Deep Blue. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2002.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  46. R. M. Hyatt. Crafty. ftp.cis.uab.edu/pub/hyatt, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  47. R. M. Hyatt, H. L. Nelson, and A. E. Gower. Cray Blitz. In T. A. Marsland and J. Schaeffer, editors, Computers, Chess, and Cognition, pages 111-130. Springer Verlag, New York, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  48. IBM Corporation. Deep Blue technology. http://www.research.ibm.com/know/blue.html, 2006.

  49. L. Kaelbling, M. L. Littman, and A. W. Moore. Reinforcement learning: A survey. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 4:237-285, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  50. G. Kendall and G. Whitwell. An evolutionary approach for the tuning of a chess evaluation function using population dynamics. In Proceedings of the 2001 Congress on Evolutionary Computation CEC2001, pages 995-1002. IEEE Press, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  51. D. Kopec and I. Bratko. The Bratko-Kopec experiment: A comparison of human and computer performance in chess. In M. R. B. Clarke, editor, Advances on Computer Chess 3, pages 57-72. Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  52. C. Kotnik and J. K. Kalita. The significance of temporal-difference learning in self-play training td-rummy versus evo-rummy. In T. Fawcett and N. Mishra, editors, Machine Learning, Proceedings of the Twentieth International Conference (ICML 2003), pages 369-375, Washington, DC, USA, August 2003. AAAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  53. H. Kuijf. Jack - computer bridge playing program. http://www.jackbridge.com, 2006.

  54. M. Kusiak, K. Waledzik, and J. Mandziuk. Evolution of heuristics for give-away checkers. In W. Duch et al., editors, Artificial Neural Networks: Formal Models and Their Applications - Proc. ICANN 2005, Part 2, Warszawa, Poland, volume 3697 of LNCS, pages 981-987. Springer, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  55. R. Levinson. MORPH II: A universal agent: Progress report and proposal. Technical Report UCSC-CRL-94-22, Jack Baskin School of Engineering, Department of Computer Science, University of California, Santa Cruz, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  56. R. A. Levinson and R. Snyder. Adaptive pattern-oriented chess. In L. Birnbaum and G. Collins, editors, Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Machine Learning, pages 85-89. Morgan Kaufmann, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  57. A. Macleod. Perudo as a development platform for Artificial Intelligence. In 13th Game-On International Conference (CGAIDE’04), pages 268-272, Reading, UK, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  58. A. Macleod. Perudo game. http://www.playperudo.com/, 2006.

  59. J. Mandziuk. Incremental learning approach for board game playing agents. In Proceedings of the 2000 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IC-AI2000), volume 2, pages 705-711, Las Vegas, USA, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  60. J. Mandziuk. Incremental training in game playing domain. In Proceedings of the International ICSC Congress on Intelligent Systems & Applications (ISA2000), volume 2, pages 18-23, Wollongong, Australia, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  61. J. Mandziuk, M. Kusiak, and K. Waledzik. Evolutionary-based heuristic generators for checkers and give-away checkers. Expert Systems, 2007, (accepted ).

    Google Scholar 

  62. J. Mandziuk and K. Mossakowski. Looking inside neural networks trained to solve double-dummy bridge problems. In 5th Game-On International Conference on Computer Games: Artificial Intelligence, Design and Education (CGAIDE04), pages 182-186, Reading, UK, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  63. J. Mandziuk and D. Osman. Temporal difference approach to playing give-away checkers. In L. Rutkowski et al., editors, 7th Int. Conf. on Art. Intell. and Soft Comp. (ICAISC 2004), Zakopane, Poland, volume 3070 of LNAI, pages 909-914. Springer, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  64. J. Mandziuk and L. Shastri. Incremental Class Learning approach and its application to handwritten digit recognition. Information Sciences, 141(3-4):193-217, 2002.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  65. D. McAllester. Conspiracy numbers for min-max search. Artificial Intelligence, 35:287-310, 1988.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  66. J. McCarthy. Homepage of John McCarthy. http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/reti.html, 1998.

  67. M. L. Minsky. Steps towards artificial intelligence. In Proceedings of IRE, volume 49, pages 8-30, 1961.

    Google Scholar 

  68. T. M. Mitchell and S. Thrun. Explanation based learning: A comparison of symbolic and neural network approaches. In P. E. Utgoff, editor, Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 197-204, San Mateo, CA, 1993. Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  69. D. E. Moriarty and R. Miikkulainen. Discovering complex othello strate-gies through evolutionary neural systems. Connection Science, 7(3):195-209,1995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. K. Mossakowski and J. Mandziuk. Artificial neural networks for solving double dummy bridge problems. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, 3070:915-921, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  71. K. Mossakowski and J. Mandziuk. Neural networks and the estimation of hands’ strength in contract bridge. In L. Rutkowski , editors, 8th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Soft Computing (ICAISC06), Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, pages 1189-1198, Zakopane, POLAND, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  72. M. MĂŒller. Computer Go as a sum of local games: An application of combinatorial game theory. PhD Thesis, ETH ZĂŒrich, Switzerland, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  73. M. MĂŒller. Computer Go. Artificial Intelligence, 134:145-179, 2002.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  74. A. Newell, J. C. Shaw, and H. A. Simon. Chess-playing programs and the problem of complexity. IBM Journal of Research and Development, 2(4):320-335, 1958.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  75. D. Osman and J. Mandziuk. Comparison of tdleaf(λ) and td(λ) learning in game playing domain. In N. R. Pal ., editors, 11th Int. Conf. on Neural Inf. Proc. (ICONIP 2004), Calcutta, India, volume 3316 of LNCS, pages 549-554. Springer, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  76. A. Plaat, J. Schaeffer, W. Pijls, and A. de Bruin. Best-first fixed-depth minimax algorithms. Artificial Intelligence, 87(1-2):255-293, 1996.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  77. A. Plaat, J. Schaeffer, W. Pijls, and A. de Bruin. Exploiting graph properties of game trees. In 13th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-96), volume 1, pages 234-239, Menlo Park, CA, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  78. E. A. Poe. Maelzel’s chess player. Southern Literary Messenger, (April), 1936.

    Google Scholar 

  79. J. B. Pollack, A. D. Blair, and M. Land. Coevolution of a backgammon player. In C. G. Langton and K. Shimokara, editors, Proceedings of the Fifth Artificial Life Conference, pages 92-98. MIT Press, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  80. A. Reinefeld. An improvement to the scout tree-search algorithm. ICCA Journal, 6(4):4-14, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  81. T. P. Runarsson and S. M. Lucas. Coevolution versus self-play temporal difference learning for acquiring position evaluation on small-board Go. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 9(6):628-640, 2005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. A. L. Samuel. Some studies in machine learning using the game of checkers. IBM Journal of Research and Development, 3(3):210-229, 1959.

    Google Scholar 

  83. J. Schaeffer. The history heuristic and alpha-beta search enhancements in practice. IEEE PAMI, 11(11):1203-1212, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  84. J. Schaeffer. One Jump Ahead: Challenging Human Supremacy in Checkers. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  85. J. Schaeffer. Chinook. http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/∌chinook/, 2006.

  86. J. Schaeffer. Poki-X. http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/∌ games/poker/, 2006.

  87. J. Schaeffer, J. C. Culberson, N. Treloar, B. Knight, P. Lu, and D. Szafron. A world championship caliber checkers program. Artificial Intelligence, 53(2-3):273-289, 1992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. J. Schaeffer, M. Hlynka, and V. Jussila. Temporal difference learning applied to a high-performance game-playing program. In International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pages 529-534,2001.

    Google Scholar 

  89. J. Schaeffer, R. Lake, P. Lu, and M. Bryant. Chinook: The world man-machine checkers champion. AI Magazine, 17(1):21-29, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  90. N. N. Schraudolph, P. Dayan, and T. J. Sejnowski. Temporal difference learning of position evaluation in the game of go. In J. D. Cowan, G. Tesauro, and J. Alspector, editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing 6, pages 817-824. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  91. N. N. Schraudolph, P. Dayan, and T. J. Sejnowski. Learning to evaluate go positions via temporal difference methods. In N. Baba and L. C. Jain, editors, Computational Intelligence in Games, volume 62, pages 77-98. Springer Verlag, Berlin, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Y. G. Seo, S. B. Cho, and X. Yao. Exploiting coalition in co-evolutionary learning. In Proceedings of the 2000 Congress on Evolutionary Computation, volume 2, pages 1268-1275. IEEE Press, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  93. C. E. Shannon. Programming a computer for playing chess. Philosophical Magazine, 41 (7th series)(314):256-275, 1950.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  94. B. Sheppard. World-championship-caliber scrabble. Artificial Intelligence, 134:241-275, 2002.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  95. H. Simon. Making managenet decisions: The role of intuition and emotion. In Weston Agor, editor, Intuition in Organizations, pages 23-39. Sage Pubs., London, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  96. D. Sklansky. Hold’Em Poker. Two Plus Two Publishing, Nevada, USA, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  97. D. Sklansky and M. Malmuth. Hold’Em Poker for Advanced Players, 21st Century Edition. Two Plus Two Publishing, Nevada, USA, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  98. B. Stilman. Liguistic Geometry. From search to construction. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, Dordrecht, London, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  99. G. Stockman. A minimax algorithm better than alfa-beta? Artificial Intelligence, 12(2):179-196, 1979.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  100. R. Sutton. Learning to predict by the method of temporal differences. Machine Learning, 3:9-44, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  101. R. S. Sutton and A. G. Barto. Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  102. G. Tesauro. Neurogammon wins computer olympiad. Neural Computation, 1:321-323, 1989.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  103. G. Tesauro. Practical issues in Temporal Difference Learning. Machine Learning, 8:257-277, 1992.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  104. G. Tesauro. TD-Gammon, a self-teaching backgammon program, achieves master-level play. Neural Computation, 6(2):215-219, 1994.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  105. G. Tesauro. Temporal Difference Learning and TD-Gammon. Communications of the ACM, 38(3):58-68, March 1995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  106. S. Thrun. Learning to play the game of chess. In G. Tesauro, D. Touretzky, and T. Leen, editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 7, pages 1069-1076. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  107. S. Thrun. Explanation-Based Neural Network Learning: A Lifelong Learning Approach. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA, 1996.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  108. S. Thrun and T. M. Mitchell. Learning one more thing. Technical report, Carnegie Mellon University, USA, CMU-CS-94-184, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  109. W. Tunstall-Pedoe. Genetic algorithms optimizing evaluation functions. ICCA Journal, 14(3):119-128, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  110. A. M. Turing. Digital computers applied to games. In B. V. Bowden, editor, Faster than thought: a symposium on digital computing machines, chapter 25. Pitman, London, UK, 1953.

    Google Scholar 

  111. P. E. Utgoff. Feature construction for game playing. In J. FĂŒrnkranz and M. Kubat, editors, Machines that Learn to Play Games, pages 131-152. Nova Science Publishers, Huntington, NY, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  112. A. van Tiggelen. Neural networks as a guide to opitimization. The chess middle game explored. ICCA Journal, 14(3):115-118, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  113. T. Yoshioka, S. Ishii, and M. Ito. Strategy acquisition for the game “othello” based on reinforcement learning. IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems, E82-D(12):1618-1626, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  114. A. Zorbist. Feature extractions and representation for pattern recognition and the game of go. PhD Thesis, University of Wisconsin, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Mathematics and Information Science, Warsaw University of Technology, Plac Politechniki 1, 00-661, Warsaw, Poland

    Prof. Jacek MaƄdziuk

Authors
  1. Prof. Jacek MaƄdziuk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Informatics, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Ul. Grudziadzka 5, 87-100, Torun, Poland

    WƂodzisƂaw Duch

  2. Division of Computer Science, School of Computer Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, 639798, Singapore

    WƂodzisƂaw Duch

  3. Faculty of Mathematics and Information Sciences, Warsaw University of Technology, Plac Politechniki 1, 00-661, Warsaw, Poland

    Jacek MaƄdziuk

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

MaƄdziuk, J. (2007). Computational Intelligence in Mind Games. In: Duch, W., MaƄdziuk, J. (eds) Challenges for Computational Intelligence. Studies in Computational Intelligence, vol 63. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-71984-7_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-71984-7_15

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-71983-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-71984-7

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation