If you ran 10,000 games your score is amazingly close - you won't be that close very often in 10,000 game samples. Of course I assume you are testing this against a fully conforming version.
So what exactly are you doing here to save time? My understanding is that it has something to do with traversing the list in order to avoid extra random calls. So I assume you start with a shuffled list and go from there somehow? My program(s) keep up with empty points and selects only from them but I call the random number generator once for each legal move. - Don On Sun, 2008-10-26 at 20:24 -0200, Mark Boon wrote: > On 25-okt-08, at 11:06, Don Dailey wrote: > > > I would be interested to see if your biased version can pass my > > eventual > > conformance tests. If it can, more power to you, I might use the > > idea > > myself. > > > > I had it run 10,000 games over the weekend while away. The result is > 49.9% (+/-0.5). I guess exactly 50% would be hard to come buy. > > Mark > > _______________________________________________ > computer-go mailing list > computer-go@computer-go.org > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
