Actually in my experiments on 19x19, pondering gives a VERY big strength
increase. This result is shown in our paper "Time Management for Monte-Carlo
Tree Search Applied to the Game of Go" to be published.
Aja
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Fotland" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2010 1:58 AM
Subject: Re: [Computer-go] Speculatively pondering
Many Faces does not ponder, but it's on the todo list. I don't expect
pondering to give a big strength increase compared to all the other things
queued up.
David
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:computer-go-
[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected]
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 6:45 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Computer-go] Speculatively pondering
Quoting Brian Sheppard <[email protected]>:
>> In other words: a strong opponent will cause a lot of ponder hits and
>> speculative pondering is the best way to search effectively.
>
> This makes sense, but actual measurements on CGS showed that
> speculative pondering was worse. At least for Pebbles.
>
> That experimental result is consistent with mathematical
> models, so I have confidence.
>
> Have you tested Valkyria both ways?
No, what I wrote is just what I believe. There is a lot of things I
would like to test but this is on the todo list.
Currently pondering tend to be inefficient for a different reason
since Valkyria have no garbage collection and quickly fills memory
with 4 fast cores. In forced sequences it does not ponder at all
because the tree is already full.
Magnus
_______________________________________________
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
