# Logic-based AI for Interpretable Board Game Winner Prediction with Tsetlin Machine

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.04378 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.04378/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 6 of its 25 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 8 Mar 2022.

## Builds on (most cited first, 6 of 6)

- [XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1603.02754/) (2016)
- [InterpretML: A Unified Framework for Machine Learning Interpretability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.09223/) (2019)
- [The Tsetlin Machine -- A Game Theoretic Bandit Driven Approach to Optimal Pattern Recognition with Propositional Logic](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1804.01508/) (2018)
- [On the Convergence of Tsetlin Machines for the IDENTITY- and NOT Operators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2007.14268/) (2020)
- [Massively Parallel and Asynchronous Tsetlin Machine Architecture Supporting Almost Constant-Time Scaling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.04861/) (2020)
- [Neurohex: A Deep Q-learning Hex Agent](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1604.07097/) (2016)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Building Concise Logical Patterns by Constraining Tsetlin Machine Clause Size](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2301.08190/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Hex is a turn-based two-player connection game with a high branching factor, making the game arbitrarily complex with increasing board sizes. As such, top-performing algorithms for playing Hex rely on accurate evaluation of board positions using neural networks. However, the limited interpretability of neural networks is problematic when the user wants to understand the reasoning behind the predictions made. In this paper, we propose to use propositional logic expressions to describe winning and losing board game positions, facilitating precise visual interpretation. We employ a Tsetlin Machine (TM) to learn these expressions from previously played games, describing where pieces must be located or not located for a board position to be strong. Extensive experiments on 6×6 boards compare our TM-based solution with popular machine learning algorithms like XGBoost, InterpretML, decision trees, and neural networks, considering various board configurations with 2 to 22 moves played. On average, the TM testing accuracy is 92.1%, outperforming all the other evaluated algorithms. We further demonstrate the global interpretation of the logical expressions and map them down to particular board game configurations to investigate local interpretability. We believe the resulting interpretability establishes building blocks for accurate assistive AI and human-AI collaboration, also for more complex prediction tasks.