In your (or Sylvain's?) recent paper, you wrote less than one second
interval was useless. I've observed similar. I'm now evaluating the
performance with 0.2, 0.4, 1 and 4 second intervals for 5 second per
move setting on 19x19 board on 32 nodes of HA8000 cluster.
Yes, one second is fine
Olivier Teytaud: aa5e3c330911250005v1d434a5bj8a09067a620ef...@mail.gmail.com:
In your (or Sylvain's?) recent paper, you wrote less than one second
interval was useless. I've observed similar. I'm now evaluating the
performance with 0.2, 0.4, 1 and 4 second intervals for 5 second per
move
Even if the sum-up is done in a logarithmic time (with binary tree
style), the collecting time of all infomation from all nodes is
proportional to the number of nodes if the master node has few
communication ports, isn't it?
No (unless I misunderstood what you mean, sorry in that case!) !
In message
95be1d3b0911242338u1b6bedcasf91d53bd80f69...@mail.gmail.com, Vlad
Dumitrescu vladd...@gmail.com writes
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 23:58, Nick Wedd n...@maproom.co.uk wrote:
Vlad Dumitrescu vladd...@gmail.com writes
Please try to explain why the hahn calculation isn't working in a
Hi.
I hope to have a student for the next month or two who can look into some
computer Go before starting his Masters degree. He is interested in using CUDA
for his Masters, so I thought it would be nice for him to investigate
applicability of CUDA for computer Go.
I know there was quite a
Steve,
I was one of the people who posted in the debate - I implemented light
playouts on CUDA for testing purposes, with one thread per playout
(rather than one per intersection).
I think one of the main things that I am curious about, and I don't
think I am the only one, is whether
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 12:04, Nick Wedd n...@maproom.co.uk wrote:
A program to play Hahn Go has no
reason to calculate probabilities, it should just make the biggest move it
can.
Ah, okay, now I understand your point of view. Thanks for explaining.
Making the largest move available is just
Le 25/11/2009 à 12:39, Vlad Dumitrescu a écrit :
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 12:04, Nick Wedd n...@maproom.co.uk wrote:
A program to play Hahn Go has no
reason to calculate probabilities, it should just make the biggest move it
can.
Ah, okay, now I understand your point of view. Thanks for
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 12:51, Alain Baeckeroot
alain.baecker...@laposte.net wrote:
Le 25/11/2009 à 12:39, Vlad Dumitrescu a écrit :
Making the largest move available is just one possible strategy to
attain the goal of ending the game with the most points scored. A more
general strategy is to
In message
95be1d3b0911250448r79a5b7ddu61a42c0b42410...@mail.gmail.com, Vlad
Dumitrescu vladd...@gmail.com writes
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 12:51, Alain Baeckeroot
alain.baecker...@laposte.net wrote:
Le 25/11/2009 à 12:39, Vlad Dumitrescu a écrit :
Making the largest move available is just one
A few months ago there was a post in the computer chess forums about
optimizing combinations of features. It was called orthogonal
multi-testing.
Did I mention that on this forum already? If not, here is a brief on how
it works:
Suppose you have 1 feature you want to test - you might
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 14:18, Nick Wedd n...@maproom.co.uk wrote:
If playing one move lead 10% of time to +10, and 90% to -20,
the resulting value is -17
(of course with the bot evaluation/playout)
Reducing the value to -17 is losing a lot of information. Another move
might have 20% chances
the way to do all of this exactly is with experimental design.
to design experiments correctly that handle inter-term interactions of
moderate degree, this tool is quite useful:
http://www2.research.att.com/~njas/gosset/index.html
s.
___
computer-go
I know there are heuristics for trying to understand the interactions and
without looking too hard I assume this package is just a more comprehensive
version of this.
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 9:11 AM, steve uurtamo uurt...@gmail.com wrote:
the way to do all of this exactly is with experimental
Le 25/11/2009 à 15:11, Vlad Dumitrescu a écrit :
What I am considering is a way to analyze a list of moves, each having
in turn a value that is a list of expected outcomes and their
respective estimated probabilities, and to sort the moves by the
expected outcome in the context of a given risk
Olivier Teytaud: aa5e3c330911250119x5e01fa32w2e5f3db68704d...@mail.gmail.com:
Even if the sum-up is done in a logarithmic time (with binary tree
style), the collecting time of all infomation from all nodes is
proportional to the number of nodes if the master node has few
communication ports,
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 15:49, Alain Baeckeroot
alain.baecker...@laposte.net wrote:
If using a more generic approach,
the strategy can be parametrized and optimized (both offline and
online), hopefully resulting in a better gameplay.
I don't understand how anything could be better than the
Interesting, surely the order is almost logarithmic. But how long it
takes a packet to pass through a layer. I'm afraid the actual delay
time may increase.
With gigabit ethernet my humble opinion is that you should have no problem.
But, testing what happens if you artificially cancel the
Robert Jasiek wrote:
Types of Basic Kos
http://home.snafu.de/jasiek/ko_types.pdf
Version 6 is available.
--
robert jasiek
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 09:01:22AM -0500, Don Dailey wrote:
You could of course just play games where you choose each player randomly.
If you have 256 feature you have a ridiculous number of combinations, more
than you could possibly test but before each test game you just pick a
combination
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 10:44 AM, Heikki Levanto hei...@lsd.dk wrote:
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 09:01:22AM -0500, Don Dailey wrote:
You could of course just play games where you choose each player
randomly.
If you have 256 feature you have a ridiculous number of combinations,
more
than you
Has anyone read this book?
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d.html/ref=redir_mdp_mobile/176-9930046-0953944?a=1568810326
What do you think of the contents?
--Aldric
'What is the nature of conflict?'
Sent via BlackBerry by ATT
___
computer-go mailing list
In message
461903611-1259167977-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-816036941-
@bda761.bisx.prod.on.blackberry, Aldric Giacomoni ald...@trevoke.net
writes
Has anyone read this book?
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d.html/ref=redir_mdp_mobile/176-9930046-0953
944?a=1568810326
What do you think
I read it many years ago. At the time I had never heard of
combinatorial game theory, and it's a bit hard to grasp the theory by
reading this book. Perhaps you should read Winning Ways first:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d.html/?a=1568811306
The whole theory is fascinating, but in the case of go
Aldric Giacomoni wrote:
What do you think of the contents?
The mathematical part is very good and even more mathematical. I.e.,
useful for fans of theory of applied mathematics to go and who want to
read something of the caliber of an introduction into linear algebra
as you might find in
Berlekamp came to MIT and gave a talk for us, and after that we talked
about Go and Chess and other things and took him out to eat.
I can vouch for the fact that he is a truly humble and modest person and is
a real joy to talk to. It was all thoroughly enjoyable.
- Don
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009
steve uurtamo wrote:
the way to do all of this exactly is with experimental design.
to design experiments correctly that handle inter-term interactions of
moderate degree, this tool is quite useful:
http://www2.research.att.com/~njas/gosset/index.html
That doesn't seem to directly support
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Matthew Woodcraft
matt...@woodcraft.me.ukwrote:
steve uurtamo wrote:
the way to do all of this exactly is with experimental design.
to design experiments correctly that handle inter-term interactions of
moderate degree, this tool is quite useful:
This is taken onto account in the tree.
If playing one move lead 10% of time to +10, and 90% to -20,
the resulting value is -17
(of course with the bot evaluation/playout)
Reducing the value to -17 is losing a lot of information. Another move
might have 20% chances of +10 and 80% chances
29 matches
Mail list logo
