On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 02:11, Dave Dyer <[email protected]> wrote: > > My starting point is that the root node is different from all > other nodes. The purpose of any particular search is to select > the next move.
The more correct way of thinking is that in all nodes we want to select best move, but the difference is the amount of computational resources we have before doing so. The valuation of deeper moves will likely change before the move is actually chosen (possibly by the opponent), so we have to take into account more possibilities than only the best move. > Once a particular child is far enough behind > the leaders, it's effectively eliminated, and any additional > effort spent to investigate it is a waste. For example, suppose we're going to search for 10 seconds, 5 seconds > have passed, the leading node has 10,000 visits, and some other node > has 100. It's mathematically impossible for the weak node to ever > replace the strong one. > > I'm looking for a mathematical framework for making that kind of > decision on an ongoing basis. Ideally, the top level nodes will > be eliminated one by one, as the probability that they would have > eventually been the winning choice falls below a chosen threshold. > This is closest thing that I an think of: http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.26.7961 > > _______________________________________________ > Computer-go mailing list > [email protected] > http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go > -- Łukasz
_______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
