---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Fuming Wang <[email protected]> Date: Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 1:50 PM Subject: Re: [Computer-go] News on Tromp-Cook ? To: Aja <[email protected]>
Hi Aja, Remi and S. Gelly's paper both come out in 2006,and I just checked that they did not reference each other. I just read Remi's paper again, and realized that CrazyStone's tree search approach is actually different from the popular UCT method. Similar to you, I haven't been able to get good results from the popular UCT method, so I might try CrazyStone's method for a change. In Remi's paper, CrazyStone is only having around 30% winning rate against Gnu Go 3.6, and now Erica is winning world competitions,this actually proves that high quality MC simulation (realized for the first time in MoGo) is more important than tree search algorithms. Best regards, Fuming On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Aja <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Fuming, > > The idea of improving the quality of simulation is more earlier, than > Mogo’s paper, in the Appendix A of Remi Coulom’s CG2006 paper “Efficient > Selectivity and Backup Operators in Monte-Carlo Tree Search”( > http://remi.coulom.free.fr/CG2006/CG2006.pdf): > > The choice of a more clever probability distribution can improve the > quality of the Monte-Carlo estimation.... > > I am not sure if Remi was the first one proposing this concept in Computer > Go field, but Mogo definitely was not. > > I was in Amstertam attending Computer Olympiad 2007, in the team of Chinese > chess program “Deep Elephant”. I played with Crazy Stone, Mogo and was very > surprised to see they beat me. Afterwards, Mogo’s paper is so easy to > understand/implement for me that trigger me to work on Computer Go. Indeed, > Mogo has huge contributions, especially in the popularization of MCTS. I > don’t mean to weaken or deny it, but just want to point out Crazy Stone’s > great contributions. In Erica, I use CrazyStone-like simulations > successfully. Mogo-type simulation almost does not help Erica at all. > > If we want to numerate the strongest programs, we cannot forget Fuego(2010 > UEC Cup winner) and MyGoFriend(Computer Olympiad 2010, 9x9 winner). For > academic progress, we cannot forget Crazy Stone. For practical development > usage, we cannot forget GnuGo and GoGui released by Fuego team. There were > really too many contributors in the past. > > Happy New Years to all. > > Aja > > *From:* Fuming Wang <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Friday, December 31, 2010 10:16 AM > *To:* Aja <[email protected]> ; [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [Computer-go] News on Tromp-Cook ? > > This is certainly a good time to sit back and look at what got us here. The > following key ideas have been mentioned so far: UCB, MCTS, RAVE, Pattern and > Go knowledge during MC simulation.These ideas are all essential to a strong > MC based Go program.If we want to pick the most important idea that got us > here, I would say it is the realization that adding Go Pattern and Go > Knowledge to MC simulation can significantly improve the quality of board > evaluation. This is amount to the important sampling concept in MC > integration, which is very import for Monte Carlo applications in many > fields. MC simulation with importance sampling give us for the first time a > reasonablly accurate evaluation function for Go. UCB, MCTS, RAVE are > certainly very important, however, it is still possible that new approaches > that can achieve good results with just importantly samples MC simulation. > So, I think MoGo is the most important break-through. > > Happy New Year, everyone! > Fuming > > > > On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 9:20 AM, Aja <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Jeff, >> >> When, do you think, did Mogo "started dominating all the KGS computer >> events and CGOS, and also was the first to extend that dominance from 9x9 to >> 19x19."? >> >> In Computer Olympiad 2007, Steenvreter was gold medal on 9x9. At the final >> match of 19x19, it's easily to see that Mogo and Crazy Stone were close >> (finally Mogo 1st and CS 2ed). But, at the end of 2007, Crazy Stone defeated >> Mogo and won the UEC Cup (19x19). Afterwards, Many Faces won 9x9 and 19x19 >> on 2008. Zen and Erica won 2009 and 2010, both continuing Crazy Stone >> thread. >> >> Mogo's biggest contributions, so far, in my view, are >> 1.Applied UCT to computer Go, and such application came from the idea >> "MCTS" that proposed in 2006 by Remi Coulom. Crazy Stone was using MCTS to >> win 9x9 in 2006 Computer Olympiad. >> 2.See 3x3 patterns around the previous move. >> 3.RAVE (strictly speaking, it is invented by David Silver). >> >> UCT and RAVE are for both for the tree search. I think Crazy tone's >> contribution for the playout is of same/or more important, because the >> quality of simulations decide the playing strength much. From this view, we >> should give Crazy Stone more and more credit. >> >> I don't mean to raise any debate. Mogo does has important contributions, >> but it's not so hard to assign credit to Crazy Stone. By the way, we should >> not forget Fuego and MyGoFriend. Anyway, I think SenSei's description is >> out-of-date. >> >> Aja >> >> >> -----原始郵件----- From: Jeff Nowakowski >> Sent: Friday, December 31, 2010 5:43 AM >> To: [email protected] >> >> Subject: Re: [Computer-go] News on Tromp-Cook ? >> >> On 12/30/2010 01:58 PM, David Fotland wrote: >> >>> You should also give more credit to CrazyStone as an early strong program >>> that contributed many ideas, comparable to Mogo. Remi is Aja's advisor, >>> so >>> Erica continues the CrazyStone thread. >>> >> >> I did mention CrazyStone, and the Sensei's page lists it first as the >> program that "started the new wave of MCTS programs by winning the 9x9 >> gold medal at the ICGA Computer Olympiad, in 2006." Like I said in my >> first message, though, it's hard to assign credit, and I don't mean to >> slight other programs. >> >> However, MoGo was the program that really got people to sit up and take >> notice, because it started dominating all the KGS computer events and >> CGOS, and also was the first to extend that dominance from 9x9 to 19x19. >> I believe the biggest breakthroughs were made with MoGo (building, of >> course, on earlier ideas). This is easily verified by going back to the >> archives and seeing how many people patterned their program after MoGo. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
