You can add the check back in and be more efficient than Don's nested loop by
doing something like this (warning: untested code)...
for (int mv = 0; mv < NNN; mv++)
{
credit[mv] = true; // initial assumption is that credit is awarded
for any move
}
double weight = 1.0;
double weightDelta = 2.0 / (ctm - savctm + 1);
for (int i = savctm; i < ctm; i += 2)
{
int mv = mvs[i] & MASK;
if (credit[mv])
{
wins[mv] += weight * sc;
hits[mv] += weight;
credit[mv] = false; // do not award credit for this move again
}
weight -= weightDelta;
credit[mvs[i+1] & MASK] = false; // do not award credit for the
opponent's move
}
Mark Boon wrote:
Hehe, this reminds me of the title of a CNN program: 'Keeping them
honest' ;-)
OK, let me add that check back in to see if I get better results.
Mark
On 28-okt-08, at 13:18, Michael Williams wrote:
My original chart of numbers was created before it occurred to me that
maybe the check whether the move has been played before is not
needed. It is of course possible that the check IS needed. I ran a
new test after removing that check and the numbers don't look as good:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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/
