From: David Doshay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I think that SlugGo shows rather well that some algorithms do not
scale well. SlugGo gives GNU Go about 72 times as much thinking, and
while it could be argued that some of our heuristics and evaluation
functions sometimes lead us to make worse moves, in a statistical
sense when SlugGo decides to make a move that GNU Go considered to
have a lower value, it is often correct that it is a better move
(even if rarely the "best" from the view of a good human). SlugGo is
at best 2 stones stronger than GNU Go against a third opponent. Don's
"curve" does hold much better when SlugGo plays GNU Go, where we have
seen that we can get SlugGo to beat GNU Go with 7 handicap stones
with enough lookahead time.
--- my comment:
This is why, much as I appreciate the value of the scalability study now
being done, in which I am participating, it will be even more valuable to
run a study against a variety of opponents. Of course that is easier said
than done, alas.
There are some efforts, such as the Home SETI search, which make it
easier to recruit people to volunteer spare computer cycles. It will take
a good bit of effort to set things up, but once done, the process seems
to be fairly automatic.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Cheap talk?
Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates.
http://voice.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
