On Thu, 21 Oct 2010, Matthew Woodcraft wrote:
(Unlike what others are reporting, I do see a big improvement from RAVE even with uniform random playouts.)
I think we agree. I see a big improvement with AMAF (not RAVE) with uniform playouts (no UCT) too. But once I use UCT the improvement of AMAF (not RAVE) is only minimal. I use the terms AMAF: all move as first (after the simulations) RAVE: use the AMAF values to seed the (UCT) tree search I would like to repeat this suggestion: Run your uniform random bot (no AMAF/UCT/RAVE) on 9x9 CGOS with 10k or 50k playouts and compare to myCtest-10k/50k. This should tell you if you ave a (fairly) bugfree implementation of the "don't-fill-your-own-eye" rule. Christoph _______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
