What do you mean by "break symmetry"? To me, it means play a move that results in an asymetric board. But why not just detect the symmetric moves and only simulate one of them?

[email protected] wrote:

...

Valkyria currently play quite narrow book starting with E5. Since the last tournament I noticed I should try to break symmetry before letting it think because other wise it could spend a minute on two moves that are symmetric. But I am considering to widen the choices for Black on the first move.

...

Quoting Martin Mueller <[email protected]>:

It is just an experiment that I am running right now. I don't know which move is better. The M in the version number 1111M indicates that the program is a modified version. In this case the modification is that I added or changed a few moves in the book. But I am not confident in these changes so it is not in the svn. This modified version will randomly choose either E5 or E4. See the diff below.

    Martin

diff book.dat book-3.dat
1504c1504
< 9 | E5
---
9 | E5 E4
1698c1698
< 9 E5 G5 | F3 G4
---
9 E5 G5 | F3
2370c2370
< 9 F5 D5 E6 | F4
---
9 F5 D5 E6 | E4
2732c2732
< 9 D5 F5 F4 G4 E4 G3 F6 | G6
---
9 D5 F5 F4 G4 E4 G3 F6 | G5
2913a2914,2919
9 E5 E3 C4 C3 B3 D4 | D5
9 E5 E3 C4 D4 | D5
9 E5 E3 C4 D4 D5 C3 | E4
9 E5 E3 C4 D4 D5 C3 E4 D3 | G4
9 E4 E6 | D6
9 E4 E6 D6 D7 D5 C7 | F6

    Martin

I noticed on CGOS that the latest Fuego is starting at the 5-4 point rather
than the 5-5 point.  I know that Fuego uses a book.  Does this mean that
analysis of games between strong programs shows that 5-4 is significantly
better than 5-5?

_______________________________________________
Computer-go mailing list
[email protected]
http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go



_______________________________________________
Computer-go mailing list
[email protected]
http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go


_______________________________________________
Computer-go mailing list
[email protected]
http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go

Reply via email to