Claus Reinke wrote:
- the only thing that guarantees termination of random playouts (with or
without dfyoe) is the positional superko rule: no whole-board repetitions
allowed. Waiting for this to kick in without taking other measures is not
an option: it takes too long and the
Valkyria does, because is superheavy anyway! A lot of weird stuff can
happen near the end of the game against programs that play randomly. I
think I implemented it because I had to to make it play correctly in
some positions. But it was a long time so I do not remember the details.
-Magnus
Claus,
I think you have summarized things better than I am going to, but here
goes anyway:
If the play-outs are uniformly random and you have eye rule, it is
guaranteed to terminate as long as you use simple ko. It might even be
guaranteed to terminate if you don't, I don't know. Although
I stand corrected. Do you know if you were able to measure a strength increase?
Magnus Persson wrote:
Valkyria does, because is superheavy anyway! A lot of weird stuff can
happen near the end of the game against programs that play randomly. I
think I implemented it because I had to to make
No, if there was a serious problem it would perhaps only happen for 1
in 1000 games. So it would be pointless trying to measure it. And some
of these problems only happens against extremely weak programs. At
least in my experience.
-Magnus
Quoting Michael Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I
On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 9:26 AM, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you use zobrist hashing, it is probably not ridiculously slow to do
this. And if your play-outs are pretty heavy anyway, the cost will be
negligible as you say.
Has anyone tried to use a Bloom filter (
Álvaro,
I never tried it, but I once considered doing it. It's an intriguing
idea. Since speed is all important here I would probably try just a
single probe version (bloom filter with k = 1 where k is the number of
hash functions.)
You have to clear the filter before each playout of course,
If you use zobrist hashing, it is probably not ridiculously slow to do
this. And if your play-outs are pretty heavy anyway, the cost will be
negligible as you say.
I remember John Stanback, the Zarkov chess programmer used to say that
he could add anything he wanted to the evaluation function
I wrote a simple Bloom filter and I tried feeding it a sequence of
random numbers (which is what Zobrist keys would look like if there
are no repetitions), to see how many false positives I would get, with
different values for k. I tried using 128 bytes, 256 bytes and 512
bytes. In every case. It
You are incorrect that the following heuristics in random games lead
to finite game length:
* no eye filling
* no suicide
* no simple ko violations
Consider two eyeless chains with 3 ko's connecting them... Two taken
by black and it's white's move. Filling the one ko it has is suicide.
It
You might be right. I have a liberal game length limit on my play-outs
so I didn't notice this.
Another game limiting rule could be something based on counting the
number of consecutive 1 stone captures and terminating once this goes
beyond some reasonable limit such as 10.Would infinite
Sure, some long cycles have multi-stone captures.
Erik
On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 4:39 PM, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You might be right. I have a liberal game length limit on my play-outs
so I didn't notice this.
Another game limiting rule could be something based on counting the
On Oct 9, 2008, at 10:41 AM, Erik van der Werf [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Sure, some long cycles have multi-stone captures.
Can you provide an example? When I've thought about multi-stone
captured before, I was unable to create a scenario that lead to
infinite _random_ games. Many
Hi again, with yet another question:-)
Could someone please summarize the state-of-the art wrt the various ways
of limiting random playouts, and the their consequences?
There are several variations on the don't fill your own eyes (dfyoe) approach,
but the way this approach is often described
On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 5:03 PM, Jason House [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 9, 2008, at 10:41 AM, Erik van der Werf [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Sure, some long cycles have multi-stone captures.
Can you provide an example?
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~wjh/go/rules/bestiary.html
On Thu, 2008-10-09 at 09:15 -0400, Michael Williams wrote:
I stand corrected. Do you know if you were able to measure a strength
increase?
I think you almost have to have either superko or some limiting device
in a program with heavy play-outs. I don't know what Magnus does, but
Lazarus
Which multi stone capture case still exists under random games?
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 9, 2008, at 11:12 AM, Erik van der Werf [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 5:03 PM, Jason House [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Oct 9, 2008, at 10:41 AM, Erik van der Werf [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Oct 9, 2008, at 11:08 AM, Eric Boesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 10:25 AM, Jason House
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You are incorrect that the following heuristics in random games
lead to
finite game length:
* no eye filling
* no suicide
* no simple ko violations
Anything can exist in a random game :-) Sent-two-return-one may me the
biggest practical concern, but I would not be surprised if some day a
molasses ko would pop up as well, especially if your playouts are not
too stupid.
Erik
On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 5:24 PM, Jason House [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 9-okt-08, at 10:15, Don Dailey wrote:
If the play-outs are uniformly random and you have eye rule, it is
guaranteed to terminate as long as you use simple ko.
I don't think this is quite correct. With using just simple ko
there's a chance you end the game in a never-ending triple-ko.
On Oct 9, 2008, at 11:46 AM, Erik van der Werf [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Anything can exist in a random game :-)
Occur yes, repeat forever requires very special situations.
Sent-two-return-one may me the
biggest practical concern
This is naturally resolved in light random playouts since
On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 11:39 AM, Jason House
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 9, 2008, at 11:08 AM, Eric Boesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
Does anyone allow passing at random in their playouts??? A game stopped from
two premature passes is tough to score, if not completely meaningless.
I
Anything can exist in a random game :-)
Occur yes, repeat forever requires very special situations.
That makes long repeats unlikely in any individual run, and infinite
runs infinitely unlikely, unless we run into one of those very special
situations. But how special do these actually need to
23 matches
Mail list logo
