On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 15:00 -0200, Mark Boon wrote:
> Thanks again for more explanations. I think the AMAF is clear to me now.
> 
> 
> >> When you say you count all the playouts starting from an empty board,
> >> then
> >> I have no idea how our outcome can be different by 3-4 moves,  
> >> which is
> >> coincidentally the average depth of a uniform tree of 1,000,000 moves
> >> on a 9x9 board.
> >
> > Well we are doing 2 completely different things - so it is  
> > surprising to
> > me that we actually came that close.
> >
> >>
> 
> 
> This I don't understand. Both do a playout starting from an empty  
> board, trying every move but ko-captures and eye-filling moves (using  
> the same definition of eye). These are not completely different  
> things. These should be EXACLTY the same things. The only thing  
> different is that in my program the first few moves are selected by  
> my UCT search instead of random selection as in your program. But I  
> believe that does not affect the average game length one bit.

I believe this might have a small effect on the game length, but it's
probably not the explanation.

> 
> When I just run playouts from an empty board I get the same average  
> length, confirming that UCT selection does not influence the game- 
> length. I didn't assume you were doing a UCT search. I didn't  
> understand what kind of search you did exactly but in any case failed  
> to see how it would change the average game-length.

You are getting about 3.5 extra moves.  I count pass moves including the
2 at the end, and I assume you do the same but if you were not that
would bring your count down - so that doesn't explain the problem.

This is exactly why I wanted to do this - to get verification between
bots.   So we must explore these 2 possibilities:

  1. I am doing it wrong.

  2. You are doing it wrong.


The things to check for both of us are:

  1. proper 1 point eye definition?  
  2. simple ko testing (are you testing for simple ko?)
  3. proper node count accounting.
  4. properly random (in a perfectly uniform way.)
  5. N*3 max game length (this is probably not the issue even if it's
wrong)
  6. Do we stop after 2 passes?  
  7. Never include a pass move in playout UNLESS no other move is
possible.
  8. suicide NOT allowed.
  9. PSK never tested in the playouts.


> 
> This is still something I don't understand. Are there others who  
> implemented the same thing and got 111 moves per game on average? I  
> tried to look through some posts on this list but didn't see any  
> other numbers published.

So far I don't think anyone else has published.   Please go down my
checklist above and I'll do the same.   If I implemented it wrong, I did
it in all 3 bots I have completed so far, but that means little, they
were all almost direct ports of each other in C-like languages.

- Don



> 
> Mark
> 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

Reply via email to