Although speed matters, the quality of simulations is dominant.  When 
the simulations cannot manage a postion correctly, speed is useless.  

Hideki
 
Bojun Huang: <[email protected]>:
>It seems to me that, there is a thread of efforts that try to improve the 
>playing capability 
>of GO bots by dramatically increasing playouts/sec. Now we know that FPGA, 
>GPU, and SIMD can 
>make much more playouts per second than single-core CPU, but all these results 
>are based on 
>"light" playout schemes. So everytime when these kind of results come out, 
>people would doubt 
>the likelihood that these designs really generate strong programs.
>
>So my question is, Is there a "widely accepted" baseline performance to 
>compare with for all 
>these works?
> 
>For example, we may pick a known program with "lightest" playout scheme among 
>those 
>frequently attending the KGS monthly. So if a high-performance design 
>implements similar 
>playout scheme of that program but achieves much higher playout/sec, we could 
>reasonably 
>expect a stronger program based on this design. 
> 
>Another question ... does more playouts really provide a *consistent* 
>improvement on the ELO 
>score, especially for those strongest programs? I remember that some programs 
>running on 
>laptop rank very high in the Olympaids, that seems imply that speed simply 
>doesn't matter 
>here ...
> 
>Thanks,
>Bojun Huang
>
>>Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 22:23:29 +0200
>>From: Antoine de Maricourt <[email protected]>
>>To: [email protected]
>>Subject: Re: [Computer-go] Direct DX11 and graphics cards for cheaper
>>      simulation hardware?
>>Message-ID: [email protected]>
>>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>>
>>
>>> Despite the challenges using it in a tree, and the contentious issue of
>>> whether light playouts can make a really strong program, I think this is
>>> interesting research. By 1.6 times quicker than libego, do you mean as
>>> it runs on the CPU? Or is this a simulated speed as if it was running on
>>> the GPU? I think libego was the clear leader in light playout speed, so
>>> working out a way to do playouts even faster (if that is what you have
>>> done) is amazing.
>>I just emulated data structures and algorithms that are targeting GPU  
>>in C++ for a CPU. 128-bit CPU's SIMD instruction set simply emulates 4 
>>GPU-like threads working on 32-bit registers. After several attempts 
>>made to test various ideas, the first complete implementation had 
>>performances similar to libego, without a simple CPU specific 
>>optimization. I then put back some specific CPU optimizations (not 
>>likely to be effective on GPU) + tuning and easily improved the 
>>performances. This is really how it runs on the CPU. The same data 
>>structure and algorithm is likely to have an even better ratio against 
>>libego with an AVX enabled processor.
>>
>>Light playout was a beginning to start with. The random move generator 
>>has been designed to take into account a probability distribution (with 
>>a little slowdown) that can be derived from local pattern matching.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>     Antoine
>---- inline file
>_______________________________________________
>Computer-go mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
-- 
Hideki Kato <mailto:[email protected]>
_______________________________________________
Computer-go mailing list
[email protected]
http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go

Reply via email to