Solving Heads-Up Limit Texas Hold'em

Authors: Oskari Tammelin, Neil Burch, Michael Johanson, Michael Bowling

IJCAI 2015 | Conference PDF | Archive PDF | Plain Text | LLM Run Details

Reproducibility Variable Result LLM Response
Research Type Experimental In this section, our experiments will demonstrate the empirical advantages of CFR+ over CFR, and highlight the engineering decisions that must be made for large-scale implementations. Our domain for these experiments is Rhode Island hold em, a small synthetic poker game with a similar structure to HULHE. We also demonstrate the strong performance of CFR+ is not limited to poker-like games by comparing CFR and CFR+ in matrix games.
Researcher Affiliation Collaboration Oskari Tammelin,1 Neil Burch,2 Michael Johanson2 and Michael Bowling2 1http://jeskola.net, ot@iki.fi 2Department of Computing Science, University of Alberta
Pseudocode No The paper describes algorithms (CFR, CFR+) in textual form but does not provide structured pseudocode or algorithm blocks.
Open Source Code No The paper does not provide an explicit statement about releasing source code for the described methodology or a link to a code repository.
Open Datasets No The paper focuses on solving a game (Heads-Up Limit Texas Hold em, Rhode Island hold em) rather than using a pre-existing dataset with public access. It defines the game environment itself.
Dataset Splits No The paper focuses on solving a game rather than using a dataset with predefined train/validation/test splits in the traditional machine learning sense. Performance is measured by exploitability and convergence over iterations.
Hardware Specification No The paper mentions '4800 CPUs' and 'a high-performance cluster' provided by 'Calcul Qu ebec, Westgrid, and Compute Canada' but does not specify exact CPU models, GPU models, or other detailed hardware specifications.
Software Dependencies No The paper describes algorithmic and engineering details but does not list specific software dependencies with version numbers (e.g., Python, PyTorch, specific solvers).
Experiment Setup Yes In Figure 1c, we demonstrate the first part of this tradeoff in Rhode Island hold em. Each curve shows the convergence of the CFR+ average strategy when the regret values use a scaling parameter from the set: {0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64}.