Re: [computer-go] Congratulations to Fuego, the new champion!
David Fotland: 0acc01c9d454$addcf450$0996dc...@com: Congratulations to Fuego, Mogo, and Yogo. It's a tremendous accomplishment for an open source program to win the championship. Oh, also an open source program developed by a group at U of Tokyo, GPS shogi, won the 19th World Computer Shogi Championship. http://www.computer-shogi.org/index_e.html http://www.computer-shogi.org/wcsc19/index_e.html It could be a new tide... Hideki David -Original Message- From: computer-go-boun...@computer-go.org [mailto:computer-go- boun...@computer-go.org] On Behalf Of Rémi Coulom Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 2:53 PM To: computer-go Subject: Re: [computer-go] Congratulations to Fuego, the new champion! Congratulations to the Fuego team. Also, congratulations to MoGo for silver, and Yogo for bronze.You can see games and results there: http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/icga/tournament.php?id=194 Thanks to Martin Mueller for entering all the tournament data into the ICGA database. Rémi ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ -- g...@nue.ci.i.u-tokyo.ac.jp (Kato) ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
[computer-go] Merging libego and fuego
Libego has similar goal as fuego - to become universal platform for experimenting with MC GO. For a few days there has been talk about merging libego (mostly fast board implementation) with fuego. But I can't do it on my own. Is there anybody interested in helping? Lukasz Lew ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Implications of a CPU vs Memory trend on MCTS
Michael Williams wrote: I want to correct that last statement. With about 350M nodes currently in the tree (~30M of which fit into memory), I am averaging 0.06 disk reads per tree traversal. What makes the nodes so big? -M- ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Implications of a CPU vs Memory trend on MCTS
C# does. It should only take 30 bytes per node to store the information I need to have. But somehow that turns into 50 bytes. Byte alignment plus class overhead, I guess. Matthew Woodcraft wrote: Michael Williams wrote: I want to correct that last statement. With about 350M nodes currently in the tree (~30M of which fit into memory), I am averaging 0.06 disk reads per tree traversal. What makes the nodes so big? -M- ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Implications of a CPU vs Memory trend on MCTS
It's on my list of things to improve. Michael Williams wrote: C# does. It should only take 30 bytes per node to store the information I need to have. But somehow that turns into 50 bytes. Byte alignment plus class overhead, I guess. Matthew Woodcraft wrote: Michael Williams wrote: I want to correct that last statement. With about 350M nodes currently in the tree (~30M of which fit into memory), I am averaging 0.06 disk reads per tree traversal. What makes the nodes so big? -M- ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
RE: [computer-go] Implications of a CPU vs Memory trend on MCTS
Are you not using rave? If you keep rave counters for each legal move in the node it should be much bigger than this. David -Original Message- From: computer-go-boun...@computer-go.org [mailto:computer-go- boun...@computer-go.org] On Behalf Of Michael Williams Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 7:08 AM To: computer-go@computer-go.org Subject: Re: [computer-go] Implications of a CPU vs Memory trend on MCTS C# does. It should only take 30 bytes per node to store the information I need to have. But somehow that turns into 50 bytes. Byte alignment plus class overhead, I guess. Matthew Woodcraft wrote: Michael Williams wrote: I want to correct that last statement. With about 350M nodes currently in the tree (~30M of which fit into memory), I am averaging 0.06 disk reads per tree traversal. What makes the nodes so big? -M- ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Implications of a CPU vs Memory trend on MCTS
I am not using rave yet. Also on list. David Fotland wrote: Are you not using rave? If you keep rave counters for each legal move in the node it should be much bigger than this. David -Original Message- From: computer-go-boun...@computer-go.org [mailto:computer-go- boun...@computer-go.org] On Behalf Of Michael Williams Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 7:08 AM To: computer-go@computer-go.org Subject: Re: [computer-go] Implications of a CPU vs Memory trend on MCTS C# does. It should only take 30 bytes per node to store the information I need to have. But somehow that turns into 50 bytes. Byte alignment plus class overhead, I guess. Matthew Woodcraft wrote: Michael Williams wrote: I want to correct that last statement. With about 350M nodes currently in the tree (~30M of which fit into memory), I am averaging 0.06 disk reads per tree traversal. What makes the nodes so big? -M- ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Merging libego and fuego
I think this would be cool and very interesting, and I am definitely interested in helping. ~ Chase Albert On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 06:43, Łukasz Lew lukasz@gmail.com wrote: Libego has similar goal as fuego - to become universal platform for experimenting with MC GO. For a few days there has been talk about merging libego (mostly fast board implementation) with fuego. But I can't do it on my own. Is there anybody interested in helping? Lukasz Lew ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
