On Wed, Oct 31, 2007 at 01:00:07PM -0400, Don Dailey wrote: > I think the right approach was mentioned just recently, add a very tiny > incentive that cannot effect any bits of the main calculation as a kind > of tie-breaker. I doubt this will buy much, but it might help just > slightly and make it appear to play more "natural" by our standards. > But I know trying to fix this any other way reduces the playing strength > significantly.
Yes, I did experiment that the last time I was playing with computer go. It does work. I did not see any decrease in strength, and I did see an improvement in the look of the game. But I did not run systematical tests to prove that there was no negative effects. The extra benefit has to be so small that it can not affect the result when there is a single game difference in the MC scores, of course. -H P.S. I am about to start playing with a go program again, I have some more ideas to improve simple MC things. UCT etc will have to wait until I can see what happens with those... -- Heikki Levanto "In Murphy We Turst" heikki (at) lsd (dot) dk _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
