Tim Foden wrote: > Don Dailey wrote: >> I suggest >> exactly 25,000 play-outs that we should standardize on. 50,000 will >> tax my spare computer which I like to use for modest CGOS tests. >> If it is agreed, I will start a 25k test. My prediction is that this >> will finish around 1600 ELO on CGOS. > OK, I added Fluke to this (25k) test (twice), before I saw the later > comment about using 10k too. > > Its looking like your drdGeneric 25k bot is currently around 1475 (147 > games). > > Fluke on the other hand looks to be settling at around 1300 (125 > games). I feel that I've probably got a problem in my > implementation! :) (I've felt this for some time actually -- UCT > never seemed to work well for me at all.) > > Details of Fluke's UCT + Random playouts. > > 1. UCT constant, c = 0.25. e.g. UCB value = averageScore + c * > sqrt(log(n)/m). > 2. New children are created once a node is visited 1 time (URd) or 2 > times (UR2). > 3. Eye rule for random playouts: > * Solid eyes (all 4 from same group). > * False non-solid eyes (at least 50% of corners are of opposite > colour). > 4. Choosing legal moves for playouts: 1st probe is random, then scan. > > Is there anything else that's likely to be significant here? 1. My UCT constant is 1.0 - my formula is averageScore + c * sqrt( (2.0 * log(n)) / (10.0 * m) ); 2. New children are created when parent exceeds 100 visits. 3. I think the eye rule is the same (you state it differently, but I believe it's the same.) 4. playouts are truly uniform random - yours are not.
I think point 4 could be significant but I can't be sure. - Don > > I guess I'll let it play some more games and see where it ends up. > > Cheers, Tim. > _______________________________________________ > 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/
