The Upper Confidence Bounds For Trees (UCT) algorithm is not agnostic to the reward scale of the game it is applied to. For zero-sum games with the sparse rewards of <tex-math notation="LaTeX">-1,0,1</tex-math> at the end of the game, this is not a problem, but many games often feature dense rewards with hand-picked reward scales, causing a node's Q-value to span different magnitudes across different games. In this paper, we evaluate various strategies for adaptively choosing the UCT exploration constant <tex-math notation="LaTeX">λ</tex-math>, called <tex-math notation="LaTeX">λ</tex-math>-strategies, that are agnostic to the game's reward scale. These <tex-math notation="LaTeX">λ</tex-math>-strategies include those proposed in the literature as well as five new strategies. Given our experimental results, we recommend using one of our newly suggested <tex-math notation="LaTeX">λ</tex-math>-strategies, which is to choose <tex-math notation="LaTeX">λ</tex-math> as <tex-math notation="LaTeX">2 · σ</tex-math> where <tex-math notation="LaTeX">σ</tex-math> is the empirical standard deviation of all state-action pairs' Q-values of the search tree. This method outperforms existing <tex-math notation="LaTeX">λ</tex-math>-strategies across a wide range of tasks both in terms of a single parameter value and the peak performances obtained by optimizing all available parameters.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Schmöcker et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: