-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Jon Kinsey wrote: > I did notice a call to NeuralNetEvaluate in FindBestMoveInEval(). Which > doesn't use the 128 equivalent - does anyone know if this is correct?
Yes, but.... It's correct because FindBestMoveInEval calls the smaller pruning neural nets. These net's has only 5 hidden nodes. I don't think that's worth vectorizing. However... What if it was 8 hidden nodes? Or 12? I guess a vectorized 8 hidden node neural net would be even faster that a 5 hidden node net unvectorized. Is feasible to retrain the pruning nets to have 8 hidden nodes instead of 5? Will it gain anything at all? Is it worth the effort? Joseph? Any comments? - -Øystein -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDSr7p6kDTFPhwyqYRAlDdAJ49eVFzwlMilj0UpEHSYIdKLcipEgCfVvmR 3u8DpK9NSuLSMsLW9QbX3f4= =/AO3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
