Build an AI to win 2048 game
The most important thing about 2048 is to reach the highest score by moving tiles and merging the same tile.
We have to define how to move tiles in a game and how to generate new tile after every move.
The codes is in the Env.py
My first attempt is to use Monte Carlo tree search method to win the game. I tried to go through all the possible moves in the given search depth, and then compared the scores in the result to choose the best decision in the specific situation.
The codes is in the 2048_Search.py
In this method, I set the depth from 1 to 5 and ran 100 times in each depth.
Here is some result.
Ps: Average win rate represents the chance to reach 2048.
Average max score : 210.24
Average win rate :0%
| Max Reach | Counts | Accumulate % | Reverse Accumulate % |
|---|---|---|---|
| 32 | 1 | 1% | 100% |
| 64 | 6 | 7% | 99% |
| 128 | 39 | 46% | 93% |
| 256 | 47 | 93% | 54% |
| 512 | 7 | 100% | 7% |
| 1024 | 0 | 100% | 0% |
Average max score : 1223.68
Average win rate :30%
| Max Reach | Counts | Accumulate % | Reverse Accumulate % |
|---|---|---|---|
| 256 | 4 | 4% | 100% |
| 512 | 19 | 23% | 96% |
| 1024 | 47 | 70% | 77% |
| 2048 | 29 | 99% | 30% |
| 4096 | 1 | 100% | 1% |
| 8192 | 0 | 100% | 0% |
Average max score : 1646.08
Average win rate :54%
| Max Reach | Counts | Accumulate % | Reverse Accumulate % |
|---|---|---|---|
| 256 | 1 | 1% | 100% |
| 512 | 9 | 10% | 99% |
| 1024 | 36 | 46% | 90% |
| 2048 | 48 | 94% | 54% |
| 4096 | 6 | 100% | 6% |
| 8192 | 0 | 100% | 0% |
Average max score : 2216.96
Average win rate :78%
| Max Reach | Counts | Accumulate % | Reverse Accumulate % |
|---|---|---|---|
| 256 | 0 | 0% | 100% |
| 512 | 3 | 3% | 100% |
| 1024 | 19 | 22% | 97% |
| 2048 | 58 | 80% | 78% |
| 4096 | 20 | 100% | 20% |
| 8192 | 0 | 100% | 0% |
Average max score : 2467.84
Average win rate :78%
| Max Reach | Counts | Accumulate % | Reverse Accumulate % |
|---|---|---|---|
| 256 | 0 | 0% | 100% |
| 512 | 2 | 2% | 100% |
| 1024 | 20 | 22% | 98% |
| 2048 | 48 | 70% | 78% |
| 4096 | 29 | 99% | 30% |
| 8192 | 1 | 100% | 1% |
My computer Macbook pro 15" 2012 (mid) can't handle the massive computation amount. For those who are interested in this topic can try to set the number of depth larger to see what is happening.
I tried a different approach to this problem. In the begining stage of the game, I used small depth to search to speed up the process. The depth starts from 2 and gets one more larger after every 400 moves till reach the set depth.
I ran 200 epochs and only 42.5% of the total games reach depth 6. However, the result of depth 6 is pretty impressive.
| Max Reach | Counts | Accumulate % | Reverse Accumulate % |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1024 | 1 | 1.18% | 100% |
| 2048 | 50 | 60% | 98.8% |
| 4096 | 34 | 100% | 40% |
In depth 5, the score and the corresponding numbers of move. We can see that in average we have to move above 1600 steps to reach 2048.
| Max Reach | Counts | Sum of Moves | Average numbers of move Per game |
|---|---|---|---|
| 512 | 2 | 1172 | 586 |
| 1024 | 25 | 25321 | 1012.84 |
| 2048 | 56 | 93276 | 1665.64 |
| 4096 | 17 | 48163 | 2833.12 |
After I implemented the search method, I studied some Reinforcement Learning (RL) method. In order to understand more comprehensively about RL, I implement DQN which is one main branch of RL in 2048 game.
DQN is using Q-value as reward to evaluate the decision that machine make.
The codes is in DQN folder.
Sarsa is also a kind of RL. Sarsa is slightly different from DQN.
In short, the difference is that Sarsa policy chooses the safest way to avoid the failure (Game over) in the game.
On the other hand, DQN policy always chooses the way to reach the highest scores and sometimes get failure in the early game.
The codes is in Sarsa folder.
