On Feb 15, 2008, at 3:29 AM, Tim Foden wrote:
In your "pure MC program", do you use UCB1 to choose the next move
to search at the root? If not, what algorithm are you using? I'm
currently using UCB1 for my test in Fluke.
No, it uses a random move even at the root node.
myCtest does NOT create a tree (except for the UCT version). That
probably
explains why myCtest gains so much (more than Fluke) for addng AMAF
'myCtest-xxk-AMAF-y' has only one addition. It assigns the random-
playout result not only to the first move, but to a fraction of
all moves (simple all-moves-as-first). > What's different about
the -3, -5, and -8 versions? There seems to be > significant
strength differences between them. using N := moves in random
simulation a := AMAF moves a = pow(N,y) with y = 0.25 (3) y = 0.50
(5) y = 0.75 (8) due to the name-length limitation of CGOS (18
characters) Christoph
A question about the AMAF version... When you are updating the
statistics for the AMAF moves... which moves are you using? e.g.
are you using just the moves of the side to move (e.g. move 1, move
3, move 5.... move n), or every move (e.g. move 1, move 2, move
3... move n), or some other thing?
I use of course only the moves of 'this' player , I guess that
corresponds to
move 1,3,5,...n in you example.
When I tried it with every move Fluke seemed to play noticeably
weaker than with every other move.
I would expect that. If you use moves that were not played by the
winning/losing side that should mix up the statistics of good/bad moves
and create a somehow random move.
I also notice that there's a myCtest-10k-AMAF, with no '-y' on the
end. Is this the same as the one with '-8', or is there some other
change?
myCtest-AMAF is the final version ... I think it uses the 0.75 exponent.
Christoph
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
