I tried using AMAF with 3x3 patterns, but it didn't give any improvement. David
> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:computer-go- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Michael Williams > Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 12:02 PM > To: computer-go > Subject: Re: [computer-go] 1x1 patterns?! > > I had never considered using AMAF with larger pattern. That's an > interesting idea. Perhaps a 5-vertex cross-shaped pattern or a 3x3 > pattern. Has anyone tried > this? > > > Magnus Persson wrote: > > Probably 1x1 patterns implies that different priorities are assigned to > > the absolute position of empty moves. AMAF can be seen this way. AMAF > > learns statistics of 1x1 patterns if the move is played in the playout > > but ignores all information surrounding the move at the time it is > > played. Another example would be to have lower priorities for the moves > > at the first and second line. > > > > -Magnus > > > > Quoting Peter Drake <[email protected]>: > > > >> I've seen reference in some papers to 1x1 patterns. What does that even > >> mean? A point is either black, white, or vacant, and it's illegal to > >> play there unless it's vacant. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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/ _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
