In the comments to the first two posts, most people focused on finding the Nash equilibrium. A few people tried to do something that would better exploit obviously stupid players, but none that tried to discover the opponents’ strategy.
I mean, I explicitly considered that, I just thought that it was unlikely to pay off with only 50 rounds. I am curious to see how many hands it took your strategy to correctly identify its opponent—it’s possible that I wasn’t accounting for the fact that most opponents would only take you down half of the pathways (and thus is twice as easy to learn as a general agent).
I mean, I explicitly considered that, I just thought that it was unlikely to pay off with only 50 rounds. I am curious to see how many hands it took your strategy to correctly identify its opponent—it’s possible that I wasn’t accounting for the fact that most opponents would only take you down half of the pathways (and thus is twice as easy to learn as a general agent).