On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 18:40,  <[email protected]> wrote:
> No information is thrown away with maximizing win rate.

That is not true. :)

If you look for robustness median and quantile statistics are a good choice.

But that is not necessary because playout results almost follwow
Bernoulli distribution.
Just look at the histogram.
I say almost because it is not a sum of iid variables.  Result is a
sum of random components of not equall sizes.
Also there is artefact of killing a whole board. (especially on 9x9)


>
> :-)
>
> This is because in go it is only the sign of the final board count that
> matter.
>
> Yes I know I am very stubborn and narrow minded on this issue.
>
> It is a weird thing to fear throwing away "information" and then estimate
> the expected score which will throw away the actual distributions of
> outcomes. And so will any other statistical measure do.
>
> Also I do measure the score in at least two ways in Valkyria. One is simply
> taking the average of score at the root and the other is to estimate
> territory directly by looking at black/white membership of individual points
> of the board. The latter is much more stable and the average is often off
> several points also late in the endgame.
>
> It could also be that different programs have very different kind of
> playouts. I know that the playouts of Valkyria contains really weird stuff.
> Sometimes black wins a playout with +100 points because a lot of perfectly
> safe white groups died because of some really unlikely combination of bugs,
> omissions and randomness in the playout. Such a score does not give me
> information with any value.

Killing several groups due to bugs etc is not an issue since killing
them is independent.


>
> I do agree that maybe expected score could be useful in the opening, because
> the opening has no systematic bias yet. In the endgame however almost every
> group will have a small probability of flipping state from alive to dead or
> dead or alive, which has a little to do with actually theoretical score of
> perfect play. But these probabilities will add up to something that on
> average close to the true value but mostly it will be very wrong.
>
> So in short, I think win rates is the most robust thing to evaluate
> positions using MC playouts. And someone else have to prove me wrong! I wont
> do it. (But if someone do prove me wrong I will of course steal the idea and
> implement it).
>
> -Magnus
>
>
>
>
>
> Quoting Łukasz Lew <[email protected]>:
>
>> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 15:34,  <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Quoting Łukasz Lew <[email protected]>:
>>>
>>>> Your dynamic komi results are very convincing..
>>>> But shouldn't we just concentrate on maximizing score instead of
>>>> winning rate in the beginning of the game?
>>>
>>> Maximizing winning rate means that the probability of having a score > 0
>>> at
>>> the end of the game is maximum.
>>
>> I want to maximize expected score of a playout.
>> I think that if we set komi so that around half of the playouts have
>>  score > 0
>> AND if the noise is large (the game is in the beginning) then
>> maximixing winning rate
>> is almost the same as maximizing score.
>>
>> The drawbacks of maximizing winning rate are:
>> - we need to adhoc adjust komi to tell engine to concentrate on
>>  maximizing score
>> - we throw away information.
>>
>> Of course maximizing winning rate is the right way in low-noise
>> conditions (endgame).
>>
>>>
>>> Exactly what do you mean with "maximizing score in the beginning of the
>>> game"?
>>> It is hard to estimate the score. Also in a game of go territory is not
>>> everything. Aji and influence is also important. Win rate is as far as i
>>> know the best way of capturing all these things in one measure that
>>> guides
>>> search.
>>>
>>> Magnus
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Computer-go mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Łukasz
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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



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

Reply via email to