Vlad Dumitrescu wrote: > Hi, > > Thank you all who answered my question. I think I understand better > what each of you talks about. I still have the feeling that at some > level different people think about different things when referring to > some notion, but it's probably just me. > > On Dec 10, 2007 11:26 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> This uncertainity is what gives the less-than-1 confidence you >>> discussed, but my feeling is that it varies too much with the sequence >>> length -- the answer would be to add some intelligence, like MoGo and >>> the other top programs do. >>> >>> >> Yes. You may not have 100% confidence, but it's a huge step in the >> right direction. After all, how can you do better than actually >> matching the goal of your program with the actual goal of the game? >> Beginners essentially make it their goal to win stones, advanced players >> set the goal of doing whatever it takes to win. >> > > This is correct. But isn't a beginner that happens to have the right > goals still just a beginner, as long as it lacks the technique to > follow the goals and also can't properly evaluate the result of a line > of play? > Yes. Some monte carlo programs are better than others. Often we try to teach beginners the right habits right from the start, even though it may not be the most comfortable right away but we are concerned that they don't develop bad habits.
A common phenomenon is that you study for a while and your playing strength temporary decreases because you are digesting new information and applying it awkwardly at first. But in the long run you improve. - Don > best regards, > Vlad > _______________________________________________ > computer-go mailing list > computer-go@computer-go.org > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ > > _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
