On 9/24/07, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I've been toying around with time control lately (and failing to get it
> > right).
>
> The main principle in time control is that early moves are far more
> important than later moves.    When 2 equal fairly weak bots play, the
> game is usually over (for all practical purposes) in the first very few
> moves.  Often in the first 10 moves for example.  So you might as well
> spend a lot more time on those moves.



A very simple and yet effective strategy is to simply allocate a
> fraction of the remaining time (as reported by the GTP time_left
> command) to the next move.   The fraction you use should be based on the
> board size.    This will cause early moves to be allocated much more
> effort than later moves and ALSO has the desirable quality of speeding
> up the end-games.
>
> Arrange it so that the first move (that is not a book move) is allocated
>   considerably more time than the 30th or 40th move.
>
> I put a lower bound on how low the allocated time can dip - because when
> it get's to the point where it is playing really fast, the game is very
> likely to be within a few moves of completion.   But the lower bound is
> still pretty low - it's less than the 1/4 second CGOS gift and it's only
> purpose is to prevent a nearly random move.
>
> You can try to get more sophisticated, but you will probably be doing a
> lot of work for a gain you can't measure.   I would be surprised if you
> could find a better time control that could be demonstrated to be better
> and it certainly won't be simpler.
>
> KISS is almost always best - if not KISS you better have a really good
> reason.
>

I had a very kiss algorithm previously.  It was very close to
time_to_use = 0.1 * (time_left - 60)

I noticed that most of the time, the 60 second buffer wasn't getting used.
I've been experimenting with a reduced buffer size as a function of the
number of moves...

time_to_use = 0.1 * (time_left - x*(120-move_num) -1)+0.1, where 0.1<x<1.
The results from this have been relatively promising, but I'm trying too
hard to get x small.  I've been trying to make x adaptive based on
self-timing (which is where I really deviate from KISS).
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

Reply via email to