On Fri, 2007-01-26 at 14:47 -0500, Chris Fant wrote: > I personally would love to see more experimental results and less > feelings and intuitions on this list.
I agree. I will post my data as I go. Just for reference, this is the the Lazarus program that is currently rated at 1807 on CGOS but running 19x19 games. Current results: Rating Win perc Tot Gms Ave Time Player ------- -------- ------- -------- ------ 1600.0 75.000 4 234.8 0002 (1024 playouts) 1400.0 25.000 4 117.5 0001 (2048 playouts) Black wins: 1 25.0 % White wins: 3 75.0 % - Don > > On 1/26/07, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, 2007-01-26 at 11:32 -0800, terry mcintyre wrote: > > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- From: Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > May I ask the range of "number of playouts" tested? > > > > > > I'm still curious about this question? > > > > I think I started at 64 play-outs, and kept doubling the number > > of play-outs to some large number where it took an hour to play > > a single game. > > > > I don't currently have the data, but I am willing to reproduce > > the experiment. Other MC guys can verify it. I'll set it up > > on a slow computer I have free and I'll start at 64 simulations > > on a 19x19 board. I'll play 200 games in pairs, 64 vs 128, > > 128 vs 256, etc. > > > > - Don > > > > > > > > > > Part of my procrastination [ about using 72 processors ] is that > > > > I'm not sure how to make UCT scale to a large number of CPU's. > > > > I am an expert in scaling alpha/beta to a large numbers of > > > > processors (I did this with Socrates on 1836 processors a few > > > > years ago) but it's different with UCT which is inherently serial. > > > > > > > > > I surely appreciate the difficulties in adapting algorithms to > > > multiple processors - I may be rusty, but some years ago I > > > worked on Neuralware and multiple transputers, 860s, and > > > so forth. It gets a little hairy! > > > > > > Hasn't Mogo been parallelized to 4 processors? Can this be > > > extended to larger numbers? > > > > > > Due to the problems with heat dissipation at higher clock cycles, > > > we'll probably be working with large numbers of processors per > > > chip in the future, rather than Terahertz uniprocessors. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > > Any questions? Get answers on any topic at Yahoo! Answers. Try it now. > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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/ > > > _______________________________________________ > 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/
