I don't know if a post in the computer-go mailing list is a report, but you can find numbers in this post: http://computer-go.org/pipermail/computer-go/2008-May/014854.html
>From the numbers I would say that it shows that all sufficiently small constants are equivalent - maybe more experiments would be interesting. Olivier I'm actually looking for something weaker than what Olivier has offered: a > published report of the empirical finding that (for some programs, at least) > an exploration coefficient of zero works best. > > Peter Drake > http://www.lclark.edu/~drake/ <http://www.lclark.edu/%7Edrake/> > > > > On Nov 9, 2009, at 10:15 AM, Olivier Teytaud wrote: > > Hi; I'd like to answer your post but I must admit I've > not clearly understood. > > My PDF file is essentially a mathematical analysis, proving that we can > have consistency with some rules, without having infinitely many visits > of the whole tree. UCT has the first property (consistency), but not the > second > (UCT visits all the tree infinitely often). This is proved under clearly > stated assumptions on the problem; including deterministic two-player > zero-sum games, > and therefore including Go. > > Best regards, > Olivier > > > By result, do you mean this observation or a quest for an explanation? >> If you merely wish to say that many/most current UCT programs have no >> need for an exploration term, then that is a context-specific (e.g. >> not for the "E-E in Go" paper) heuristic or experimental statement, >> not a formal one. A source for such a statement has to be more than a >> paper that simply notices a similar effect for their own application. >> One would have to reference a larger body of experimentalists or a >> general consensus. >> >> Just my humble opinion, >> Cenny Wenner >> >> >> On 11/9/09, Peter Drake <dr...@lclark.edu> wrote: >> > Many of us have concluded that, with RAVE, there is no need for a UCT >> > exploration term: >> > >> > http://computer-go.org/pipermail/computer-go/2009-June/018773.html >> > >> > Is there a published source on this result that I could cite? >> > >> > Thanks, >> > >> > Peter Drake >> > http://www.lclark.edu/~drake/ <http://www.lclark.edu/%7Edrake/> >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > 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/ >> > > > > -- > ========================================================= > Olivier Teytaud (TAO-inria) olivier.teyt...@inria.fr > Tel (33)169154231 / Fax (33)169156586 > Equipe TAO (Inria-Futurs), LRI, UMR 8623(CNRS - Universite Paris-Sud), > bat 490 Universite Paris-Sud 91405 Orsay Cedex France > (one of the 56.5 % of french who did not vote for Sarkozy in 2007) > > > _______________________________________________ > 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/ > -- ========================================================= Olivier Teytaud (TAO-inria) olivier.teyt...@inria.fr Tel (33)169154231 / Fax (33)169156586 Equipe TAO (Inria-Futurs), LRI, UMR 8623(CNRS - Universite Paris-Sud), bat 490 Universite Paris-Sud 91405 Orsay Cedex France (one of the 56.5 % of french who did not vote for Sarkozy in 2007)
_______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
