. A source for such a statement has to be more than a
paper that simply notices a similar effect for their own application.
One would have to reference a larger body of experimentalists or a
general consensus.
Just my humble opinion,
Cenny Wenner
On 11/9/09, Peter Drake dr...@lclark.edu wrote:
Many
for their own application.
One would have to reference a larger body of experimentalists or a
general consensus.
Just my humble opinion,
Cenny Wenner
On 11/9/09, Peter Drake dr...@lclark.edu wrote:
Many of us have concluded that, with RAVE, there is no need for a UCT
exploration term:
http
-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
--
Cenny Wenner
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
the outcome of the game, I figured it'd be a good compromise.
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
--
Cenny Wenner
___
computer-go
/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
--
Cenny Wenner
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
changed the lengths of the
random playouts.
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
--
Cenny Wenner
___
computer-go mailing
I have pondered about this before however that page's proposal
furthermore changes the value of captures. If black captures x stones,
he may play at these x spots up to x times (depending on other and
size of eyes), avaraging one per capture, at the very most. In both
[territory + captures]
