In message
<[email protected]>, Vlad
Dumitrescu <[email protected]> writes
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 12:51, Alain Baeckeroot
<[email protected]> wrote:
Le 25/11/2009 à 12:39, Vlad Dumitrescu a écrit :
Making the largest move available is just one possible strategy to
attain the goal of ending the game with the most points scored. A more
general strategy is to weigh the moves' size with the risks they can
backfire.
This is taken onto account in the tree.
If playing one move lead 10% of time to +10, and 90% to -20,
the resulting value is -17
(of course with the bot evaluation/playout)
Reducing the value to -17 is losing a lot of information. Another move
might have 20% chances of +10 and 80% chances of -24 giving -17, are
they really just as good?
If you are using Hahn scoring, yes, they are just as good. With any
other form of scoring, the lost information matters.
Also, not all 10% are created equal :-) Let's say there are 10
possible moves, so only one leads to a win. It's a big difference if
that move is forced or obvious (for a human player), or if it is
something that only a professional would try after thinking for an
hour or more. I don't know how to instruct a computer to take that
into account...
To put this another way, I think that it would be a step in the right
direction to be able to handle the uncertainities of the values in the
tree. Maybe some already do that?
Yes, MC programs do that automatically, by considering only wins and
losses.
Nick
--
Nick Wedd [email protected]
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
