Michael Williams wrote:
Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
Olivier Teytaud wrote:
Also, there are probably other people interested in combining
UCT and mpi; I don't know if some people have a more precise idea
of the level of the MPI+UCT combination than us. Someone ?
MPI is just a parallel programming model/library, right?
So the only thing to know is the effective[1] speedup of the MPI
version, and how well UCT scales with increasing timecontrols/speed.
I believe Don has data on the latter and you should have data on the
former.
[1] How much faster you find the correct move. Not interesting is: how
many positions you search per second or how many playouts you do per
second.
Not exactly, because the algorithm is probably not going to be exactly
the same -- that would require too much communication between nodes.
So what? That is not relevant, as long as the algorithm is still
"UCT-like" even when parallelized, so that Don's scaling research holds.
How they parallelize is completely irrelevant as long as they measure
effective speedup, i.e. time to find the best move. There is absolutely
no requirement for the parallel algorithm to give the same results. Only
the (average) speed of the end result matters.
If you know how much faster you are, and you know how much stronger you
get by being faster, you have the answer. Both data is available.
Also good is: score versus a set opponent, or even better, set of opponents.
--
GCP
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
