Human players use reading (yomi) and feeling (kankaku) to play Go.
In MC programs, I think the reading is equivalent to UCT, and the
feeling
is equivalent to playouts. The reading is scalable, the feeling is
not.
If 2 programs have the playout algorithms of same level, The one which
used
Hello,
this is not Go, but I feel that some people here
should know the answer:
What are the results of the Connect6 competition
in the Computer Olympiad.
Thx in advance, Ingo.
--
Neu: GMX FreeDSL Komplettanschluss mit DSL 6.000 Flatrate + Telefonanschluss
für nur 17,95 Euro/mtl.!*
Ingo Althöfer wrote:
Hello,
this is not Go, but I feel that some people here
should know the answer:
What are the results of the Connect6 competition
in the Computer Olympiad.
Thx in advance, Ingo.
I forwarded the question to organizers. I'll update the web site as soon
as I have the
Remi,
I find it interesting that he won with the slowest hardware. I am still
wondering how much performance is still a low influencer. In other
words, a really fast poor algorithm won't be a better algorithm on
slower hardware (or slower software).
Jim
Rémi Coulom wrote:
Ingo Althöfer
Jim O'Flaherty wrote:
Remi,
I find it interesting that he won with the slowest hardware. I am
still wondering how much performance is still a low influencer. In
other words, a really fast poor algorithm won't be a better algorithm
on slower hardware (or slower software).
Jim
Hardware has
Oops...should have read ...a really fast poor algorithm won't be*_at_*
a better algorithm on slower hardware...
Jim O'Flaherty wrote:
Remi,
I find it interesting that he won with the slowest hardware. I am
still wondering how much performance is still a low influencer. In
other words, a
Remi,
It's not so much a question, just a thought about the use of power.
Not every MC program is the same. And that's assuming you leave all the
UCT/RAVE/etc. variations completely out of the comparisons. In fact, in
my reading this list over the last 24 months, I would say it appears
that
On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 3:47 PM, Jim O'Flaherty
jim_oflaherty...@yahoo.comwrote:
Remi,
I find it interesting that he won with the slowest hardware. I am still
wondering how much performance is still a low influencer. In other words, a
really fast poor algorithm won't be a better algorithm on
Jim O'Flaherty wrote:
That said, it means that one MC program might be using it's power much
more effectively (require substantially less CPU cycles to produce a
similarly skilled result) than another, even though both assert they are
MC.
Perhaps it would be better said that a Go program has
