> When assigning the credit value for a node which is a transposition, are
> *all* parents which point to that node credited, or just the particular one
> which led to that transposition in the current continuation? If the former
> case, that's seems like the TT would lead to more efficient learning (a bit
> "RAVE like" since a single trial results in multiple updates) although
> wouldn't it be unwieldy for a node to have a list of pointers back to its
> multiple parents?
>Obviously there's some overhead. My hash-table doesn't store positions, but
>lists of tree->nodes that have the same hash-code. So you don't need to keep
>lists of parents >explicitly, it follows from being in the same list.
Yes, that' how it's typically done, but I don't see how that leads to finding
*all* parents of a given node. The situation I'm referring to is when you're
propagating the UCT value back up the tree following a simulation. If you also
want to update *all* parents of that node (not just the single parent within
the simulated line of play), how would you find *all* of them? The parent
nodes will have different hash codes (and be in different chained lists) in
your representation. Therefore I don't see how this representation is
able answer the question "give me the list of all parent nodes which point to
this TT entry" (unless I'm missing something).
-- Greg
_______________________________________________
Computer-go mailing list
[email protected]
http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
