Leon, I don't think there is any question you can cosmetically improve the looks of the games with hacks like this. Saying it played a nice endgame but lost makes the point that good moves have little value in lost games (unless the opponent is stupid.)
So please clarify what it is you want to accomplish. Do you want to improve the strength of the program or just improve the program cosmetically or both? Also, as a computer chess author and engineer, I'm not impressed by 2 games. I don't keep versions of my chess program until it's played a minimum of 10,000 games and some changes I require more. Don On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 1:48 AM, Leon Matoh <[email protected]>wrote: > > I know that MCTS winrate does not give any usufull information about > quality of the move except winning chance > > I said that normalized winrates with random komi window give much more > information. > > So to show the concept I played two games on 13x13 between > > 1) standard pachi > > 2) and modified pachi with random komi from fixed window [-17.5,32.5] for > all game > board.c 1404 > return (32.5 - rand() % 51) + board->handicap + > scores[S_WHITE] - scores[S_BLACK]; > meaning that for EACH quick count I aplliyed komi as a random number > from window > > Games were close and very informative. > > First one standard pachi won for 0.5 and lost all points in yose. They > played until end. > > Second was misread semeai and nakade so while modified was winnig it > played correct moves and when it lost semeai played nice endgame and lost > for 3.5 > > > Please take a look at the games. > > > Leon Matoh > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
