It was a 9x9 board; any smaller, and I'm not sure it would be meaningful. Had a generous allotment of time, and 4 threads. I'll try some scalability experiments to see whether it would ever discover the problem. What happened in the game was that, after I played a stone inside the square-four, Mogo realized it was way behind, and resigned. Another poster reported similar experiences - after a redundant throw-in, Mogo became aware that the situation was unwinnable. 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: Michael Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: computer-go <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 11:50:46 AM Subject: Re: [computer-go] New scalability study : show uncertainty ? > Playouts can limit scalability. No, I don't think so. > I asked recently about Mogo not being able to detect that four liberties > in a square do not two eyes make. The only explanation offered was that the Mogo playouts rejected > the possibility of a move inside the eyespace; this skewed the UCT evaluation, leading Mogo to > mistakenly believe it had a won game when it was actually doomed even with perfect play on its part. Try increasing the size of the tree and the number of playouts. And/or try the problem on a smaller board. _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
