Michael Williams: <[email protected]>:
>Well, not literally useless, as long as you are building a tree equally
>fast.

Well, but the tree is expanded in a wrong direction, which is also 
useless, isn't it?
#I'd like to agree to add "almost" is literally correct but I believe 
that speed is really useless in that case.   It's unknown if expanding 
tree in wrong directions helps.  According to the convergence theorem of 
UCT, I bet this does not help becaues the simulations return wrong 
results.

Hideki

>On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Hideki Kato <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> 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
>>
>---- 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