Here's another way to test this sort of thing that is completely
intrinsic to the engine (doesn't require gnugo):
Start with and empty board and zero komi. Analyze using UCT until the
winning percentage at the root reaches X. Note the number of
simulations required (or the amount of time). Repeat for a larger
board size. One should probably average N trials at each board size
for more reliable numbers.
Is that a better measure of playing strength? I don't think so.
And if the only advantage is that it does not require gnugo, I don't see the
point as gnugo is a marvellous tool, why avoid it?
Sylvain
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
