________________________________
Peter Drake wrote:
>The more I study this and try different variants, the more impressed I
>am by RAVE. "Boards after the current board" is a very clever way of
>defining similarity. Also, recorded RAVE playouts, being stored in
>each node, expire in an elegant way. It still seems that RAVE fails to
>exploit some "sibling" information. For example, if I start a playout
>with black A, white B, and white wins, I should (weakly) consider B as
>a response to any black first move.
Yamato replied:
> It is exactly the same as my thought. I also have tried CRAVE, but the
> results were worse than normal RAVE.
> While RAVE is a very efficient algorithm, it strongly limits scalability
> of the program. It typically makes a fatal mistake in the position that
> the order of moves are important. We definitely need to improve RAVE,
> but it is a very tough job.
Indeed it is. How may a program reason about the order of moves? At higher
levels of play, the order of moves is often crucial.
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
