----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <computer-go@computer-go.org>
Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2006 1:24 PM
Subject: Re: [computer-go] Positions illustrative of computer stupidity ?
I think they will play very strong. Sofar all my tests indicates nice
scaling, but I admit I have not tried a proper experiment for a long time
since I do not have any extra hardware. Perhaps the Mogo team could do
something but the problem is that Mogo is so strong it would beat most
programs 100% with modest increases in computation time on 9x9.
What we can say from experiments is that the scaling with time is very
good
with few simulations, but becomes less interesting with a lot of
simulations.
This is typical for statistical sampling. The variance of the sample mean is
a function of the square-root of the sampling size. E.g. in opionion polls
one typically asks around 1000 people. Increasing the sample-size to e.g.
10.000 does not really pay-off.
It is more important to have no bias in the selection of the sample than to
increase the sample-size. And it is also more important to get an unbiased
answer. E.g. in Austria in all election opinion polls in the last years the
forecasts for the right-wing Freedom party was always much lower than the
results at the elections, and for the "Greens" it was the other way round.
The Greens are hip, the Freedom party has a bad reputation, so the
interviewed people give a socially accepted answer and make their cross in
the election box for the Freedom party.
In case of UCT the sample-bias is on purpose. I do not know if this
accelerates convergence or introduces a systematic bias. A better
performance on a finite sample sizes does not mean that the sampling
converges in the limit to the true value. I also do not know if the result
measured at the end-position has some bias.
Chrilly
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
