>
>
> Just to clarify: I was not saying that Mogo's policy consisted
> *solely* of looking for patterns around the last move. Merely that
> it does not look for patterns around *every* point, which other
> playout policies (e.g., CrazyStone, if I understand Remi's papers
> correctly) appear to do. The RL paper seems to require that
> playout design.


Fine!


>
> BTW, FillBoard seems to help Pebbles, too. A few percent better
> on 9x9 games. No testing on larger boards. YMMV, and like everything
> about computer go: all predictions are guaranteed to be wrong,
> or your money back.
>

For us the improvement is essential in 19x19 - I'll find that for the
generality
of "fillboard" if it helps also for you :-) the loss of diversity due to
patterns
is really clear in some situations, so the problem solved by fillboard is
understandable,
so I believe it should work also for you - but, as you say, all predictions
in computer-go
are almost guaranteed to be wrong :-)
Olivier
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

Reply via email to