> All this discussion made me think - has anyone tried to adjust the komi > between the simulations. Run (say) 10% of the simulations you expect to run > for a move, and see how many of the moves ended in a win. If there are many > moves, adjust the komi to make winning harder. If there no moves at all, > adjust the komi to make winning easier. Repeat after a small number of > simulations (maybe after every one).
This (if I've understood correctly) is what I thought the dynamic komi idea was, i.e.: Aim to be winning 60% of simulations. If winrate is over 60, increase the artificial komi (if black; decrease it if white) on the next move (*). If winrate is below 40, then do the opposite. *: or next set of simulations, if doing as you described above. This should work well on all board sizes, for both black and white, and in all stages of the game (though increasing the 60% threshold as the game progresses may make sense). I'm surprised people are using a simple linear decreasing rule, but very interested to hear there is a tangible improvement. Perhaps being adaptive isn't needed? Darren -- Darren Cook, Software Researcher/Developer Specializing in intelligent search (in multiple languages), discovery of context, aiding communication, and basically helping people find and make good use of their data. http://dcook.org/gobet/ (Shodan Go Bet - who will win?) http://dcook.org/mlsn/ (Multilingual open source semantic network) http://dcook.org/work/ (About me and my work) http://dcook.org/blogs.html (My blogs and articles) _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
