On 1/10/07, Łukasz Lew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 1/10/07, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-01-10 at 12:12 +0100, Łukasz Lew wrote:
> > > The interesting thing is that it can do a lot more play-outs when
> > > when X is high, although it is less strong. I need to understa
On Wed, 2007-01-10 at 18:37 +0100, Łukasz Lew wrote:
> On 1/10/07, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-01-10 at 12:12 +0100, Łukasz Lew wrote:
> > > > The interesting thing is that it can do a lot more play-outs when
> > > > when X is high, although it is less strong. I need to
On 1/10/07, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 2007-01-10 at 12:12 +0100, Łukasz Lew wrote:
> > The interesting thing is that it can do a lot more play-outs when
> > when X is high, although it is less strong. I need to understand
> > why.
> >
> > Based on the paltry data I have now
On Wed, 2007-01-10 at 12:12 +0100, Łukasz Lew wrote:
> > The interesting thing is that it can do a lot more play-outs when
> > when X is high, although it is less strong. I need to understand
> > why.
> >
> > Based on the paltry data I have now it's a mistake to use X that
> > is very high.
And
It is possible that Your uniform playout part is a lot more efficient
than UCT part, because
of costly move choosing procedure (loop).
On last Computer and Games conference I and Jakub Pawlewicz published an
article describing 1+epsilon trick that increases efficiency of
proof-number search.
It
> Just add a new child only when parent is visited more times than X.
I'm testing this very idea with UCT. I'm testing 3 versions right
now where X is different in each version. I'm testing 5, 10 and 100.
I've always used a higher value than 1 but never thoroughly checked
this out. In my tes
Just add a new child only when parent is visited more times than X.
You will loose only a minimal amount of information.
Hope this helps :)
Lukasz
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/comp
