I found the graph, but I can't find the data and the details, although
it will be on one of the postings. I think this was at least a year
ago, perhaps 2.
Here is what I remember:
I played 11 different levels, each a doubling of the previous. The
weakest level I think was just 1024 play-outs. I ran the study for
weeks in order to get substantial data points even from the highest
levels. The highest level, took a significant time to play a single
game, several times longer than the CGOS time control which was 10
minutes at the time.
The conditions were CGOS 9x9 conditions - komi 7.5, and so on, just
like CGOS 9x9.
I actually tested 2 basic versions, one with heavy play-outs and one
with light play-outs. The light play-out version basically plays
random games.
Both programs were reasonably strong UCT programs - versions of Lazarus
which probably would play at least 2100 strength on my current computer
on the current 5 minute server.
See if this link works to see the graph:
http://greencheeks.homelinux.org:8015/~drd/study.jpg
The X axis represents the number of doublings and ELO ratings are on the
Y axis.
- Don
Michael Williams wrote:
> Don Dailey wrote:
>> Mark,
>>
>> I wasn't stating a precise value for a doubling when I said 100
>> ELO. But it appears that it is actually worth a bit more than 100
>> ELO for a
>> doubling. I did a massive study of this at one point a year or
>> more ago with thousands of games with UCT based Lazarus program and the
>> strength improvement per doubling was very clear and impressive.
>
> Don, what komi did you use when you did that study? Looking in the
> archives, all I can find is you saying that komi=9 is correct. So
> does that mean 8.5 or 9.5? Or did you allow draws?
>
> _______________________________________________
> computer-go mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
>
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
