WallZero: Mastering the Game of WallGo with Strategic Analysis

Recent advancements in Computer Go, driven by AlphaZero and MuZero, rely heavily on Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) to correct the errors of the neural network policy. While effective on massive computational clusters, this dependence creates a critical bottleneck on consumer-grade hardware, where the computational cost of tree management severely limits inference rates. Furthermore, without deep search, these models suffer from hallucination, proposing moves with high confidence that are strategically fatal. This paper introduces a novel Belief-Guided architecture that disentangles the Policy head from a distinct Belief head. Unlike traditional value functions, the Belief head acts as an internal simulator and independent critic, modeling epistemic uncertainty and strategic stability. By integrating memory mechanisms (Transformer/GRU) to handle long-term dependencies and the Ko rule, and utilizing a gating mechanism to filter overconfident policy errors, our model shifts the burden of intelligence from runtime search to parametric "intuition." Experimental results demonstrate that this approach significantly improves search-free win rates and reduces hallucination, enabling professional-level play on limited hardware where massive MCTS is infeasible.

AlphaZero has demonstrated that a neural-guided Monte Carlo Tree Search can achieve superhuman performance, but strong play does not necessarily imply perfect play. We study this gap in two oracle-evaluable domains with contrasting structure: Connect Four, a solved partisan game with exact game-theoretic values, and Chomp, an impartial game whose optimal play is governed by Grundy-number structure. Under a unified self-play $+$ MCTS pipeline, we compare vanilla AlphaZero, a multi-frame variant (limited to Chomp), and an AlphaZero Auxiliary Loss (AZAL) that adds oracle-derived policy supervision. We find that vanilla AlphaZero achieves strong play across both domains but cannot preserve the exact trajectories required for optimal play: in Connect Four, it fails to maintain the optimal line of play, while in Chomp, it fails to consistently restore the $g=0$ invariant. On rectangular Chomp boards, multi-frame inputs alone do not remove this gap. Nevertheless, AZAL substantially improves oracle consistency across multi-seeded full-game traces and sampled-state evaluations. On Chomp, AZAL reaches perfect full-game oracle consistency on 10x11 and high but not complete consistency on 9x10; on Connect Four, AZAL improves oracle-match rate and delays the first oracle mistake, but does not reach perfect play.

Imperfect-information games (IIGs) are challenging, as players must make decisions without fully observing the true game state. While AlphaZero has achieved remarkable success in perfect-information games, extending it to IIGs remains difficult. Existing search-based approaches, such as Perfect Information Monte Carlo (PIMC), suffer from strategy fusion, while Information Set Monte Carlo Tree Search (IS-MCTS) incurs high computational cost when combined with neural networks. In this paper, we propose Multi-State Aggregated PoLicy Evaluation (MAPLE), a tree search method that aggregates policy and value evaluations from multiple sampled world states within a single search tree, combining the advantages of PIMC and IS-MCTS while maintaining a controllable computational cost. We further incorporate a Siamese-based sampling strategy to select informative world states from the information set. Experiments on Phantom Go and Dark Hex show that MAPLE significantly outperforms the PIMC-based AlphaZero baseline, achieving Elo improvements of 291 and 136, respectively. These results demonstrate that MAPLE is an effective approach for AlphaZero-style learning in imperfect-information games.