(sent to my email address only; now fwd to ML to share information). Thank everyone for the explanation.
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: terry mcintyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Jan 14, 2008 8:02 PM Subject: Re: [computer-go] On average how many board updates/sec can top Go programs do these days? To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The simplest form of monte-carlo Go programming would, from a given position, generate many "playouts" all the way to the end of the game. It does this by generating random legal moves. A string of legal moves, to the end, is one "playout." The evaluation function generates many random playouts and determines the "probability" of winning or losing. So-called "heavy playouts" add some intelligence to prefer some moves over others; the details vary. More details can be found by searching the computer-go archives. Terry McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Wherever is found what is called a paternal government, there is found state education. It has been discovered that the best way to insure implicit obedience is to commence tyranny in the nursery." Benjamin Disraeli, Speech in the House of Commons [June 15, 1874] ----- Original Message ---- From: mingwu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: computer-go <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 7:41:01 PM Subject: Re: [computer-go] On average how many board updates/sec can top Go programs do these days? On Jan 14, 2008 6:15 PM, Jason House <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > slow. UCT (or generically Monte Carlo) can "evaluate" a position fairly > quickly (maybe 1k-100k per second depending on how heavy the playout > is), they don't give a reliable estimate. To improve this, they end up > 1K ~ 100 K / sec is much faster than "a dozen" / sec of a conventional program. Do they calculate dragon safety (eyes, connections, patterns ...)? if not, the estimate will be VERY unreliable. But if they do, how can they be this fast compared to the more conventional programs? > reevaluating positions more than once (maybe 100 times?) to get a more > reliable estimate. > why "reevaluating" the same position? Sorry, I didn't go into their papers, can people who knows UCT, or actually working on UCT programs explain in a way that a layman can understand. Thanks. ------------------------------ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51438/*http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs>
_______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
