On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 10:37:24PM -0800, Peter Drake wrote:
> It's easy to get confused -- different researchers use the terms
> slightly differently.
>
> They both gather data on moves other than a move made from the
> current board configuration. I would say that AMAF stores statistics
> on every move played from any position, while RAVE only stores info
> on moves played from descendants of the current position.
> Consequently, AMAF uses a global table, whereas RAVE data must be
> stored at every node.
I guess that is a good definition; I assume this difference to arise
from the fact whether you use tree or flat MC, so for me, AMAF in tree
always means "from descendants of the current position". Instead, to me
AMAF is the data collected, while RAVE is the way to apply the data in
the node urgency computation (which furthermore splits to what I call
for myself Sylvain Gelly's RAVE vs David Silver's RAVE, of course...).
I think it's because I haven't seen this approach evolve and I'm not too
familiar with the pre-RAVE AMAF, so perhaps I underestimate how
revolutionary the "descendants only" idea was.
--
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
[email protected]
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
