On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 01:10:09PM +0100, Stefan Kaitschick wrote:
>
> >But, has anyone gathered stats on positions, from real games, that
> >require precise play by the defender/attacker/both/neither? Is defending
> >really easier than attacking?
> >
> >Darren
>
>
> Who is the defender?
> One side is defending his territory, the other side is defending his group.
> I think the general bias is towards overestimating the chance of killing.
> Thats what makes MCTS programs such an aggressive lot :-)
I think they are agressive mainly since killing big group is much surer
way of victory than drawn-out close game, they want to maximize the
advantage the quickest way possible.
Also my collected anectodal evidence suggests MCTS might be actually
quite lousy at counting score in tight games (at least on 19x19, and
that fact makes a lot of sense to me) - I'm not completely sure of this
though, did anyone do some extensive testing of modern MCTS on hard
endgame problems?
--
Petr "Pasky" Baudis
A lot of people have my books on their bookshelves.
That's the problem, they need to read them. -- Don Knuth
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
