> -----Original Message----- > From: Rémi Coulom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: computer-go <computer-go@computer-go.org> > Sent: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 10:22 am > Subject: Re: [computer-go] Crazystone patterns > Chris Fant a écrit : > > Does this mean that you need to calculate the Bradley-Terry > > probability for every legal move before selecting one on that > > probability? Isn't that expensive? Have you tried selecting only N > > legal candidates at random and then selecting one of those based on > > their Bradley-Terry probability distribution to save time?
> I only keep light-weight local features in the random simulations. So, it is > not expensive. A table of move urgencies can be > > > updated incrementally > after each move: only a few change. In fact, my program became faster when I > introduced 3x3 patterns > for the random simulations. I can pre-compute a lot > of information indexed by pattern shape, that are useful to detect eyes > > > > and move legality. From memory, Crazy Stone does about 5k playouts / second > from the empty position on 19x19, on one 3 > > GHz CPU, which is "only" about > 5 times slower than libego, if I remember correctly. > > Rémi > Chris Fant a écrit : > > Does this mean that you need to calculate the Bradley-Terry > > probability for every legal move before selecting one on that > > probability? Isn't that expensive? Have you tried selecting only N > > legal candidates at random and then selecting one of those based on > > their Bradley-Terry probability distribution to save time? > I only keep light-weight local features in the random simulations. So, it is > not expensive. A table of move urgencies can be > > > updated incrementally > after each move: only a few change. In fact, my program became faster when I > introduced 3x3 patterns > for the random simulations. I can pre-compute a lot > of information indexed by pattern shape, that are useful to detect eyes > > > > and move legality. From memory, Crazy Stone does about 5k playouts / second > from the empty position on 19x19, on one 3 > > GHz CPU, which is "only" about > 5 times slower than libego, if I remember correctly. > > Rémi Suppose I can generate scores for all of the moves quickly enough. I still face the problem of quickly choosing a move biased by the scores. Tournament selection is fast, but that is a function of relative ranking of the scores, not the values of the scores. Roulette wheel selection gives me an answer, but it is slow slow slow, the way I implement it anyway. Can anybody describe a good way to do this? - Dave Hillis ________________________________________________________________________ Check Out the new free AIM(R) Mail -- Unlimited storage and industry-leading spam and email virus protection.
_______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
