I would like to add that, winning is not transitive: If A>B>C, it doesn't always mean that A>C, sometimes; at least in Go, where ">" means wins.
Perhaps what we need is to show that A > (all X, where X <= B), then we can conclude that A is "transitively stronger" than B, with reference to a specific set of X's. Perhaps if we define this set of reference opponents, we can then incrementally improve the strength of the Go programs, slowly but definitely. Swee-Ann -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darren Cook Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 2:10 PM To: GNU Go development Subject: Re: [gnugo-devel] How to change the influence function? Hi, I'll just answer the non-gnugo-specific question :-). > I believe it can be said the new influence function is better if the > new GNU Go wins more games, in average, than the old one. Yes. > In other words, this new influence > function should be compared from self-play (old influence function > vs. new influence fn). Does this sound reasonable? No, tuning against just one opponent is risky. Instead set up a tournament of 3-4 programs with different styles. (Or the simpler way to do that is to put it on cgos: http://senseis.xmp.net/?ComputerGoServer ) Darren -- Darren Cook, Software Researcher/Developer http://dcook.org/mlsn/ (English-Japanese-German-Chinese-Arabic open source dictionary/semantic network) http://dcook.org/work/ (About me and my work) http://darrendev.blogspot.com/ (blog on php, flash, i18n, linux, ...) _______________________________________________ gnugo-devel mailing list gnugo-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnugo-devel _______________________________________________ gnugo-devel mailing list gnugo-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnugo-devel