Hi all,
it seems computer-go faces exciting times again.
What a wonderful world.
Switch to Kassandra mode: Several years ago (ca 2008)
Sylvain Gelly had his Ph.D. thesis and in it a section
on the quality of random game generators. One of his
n 22.12.2014 09:46, Ingo Althöfer wrote:
In total: Changing the random move generator typically will
change the playing behaviour. However, it can not be well
predicted if this change will be to the better or to the
worse.
Is this prediction theoretically impossible (why, under exactly which
Hi Martin
- Would you be willing to share some of the sgf game records played by your
network with the community? I tried to replay the game record in your
paper, but got stuck since it does not show any of the moves that got
captured.
Sorry about that, we will correct the figure and repost.
Last move info is a strange beast, isn't it? I mean, except for ko
captures, it doesn't really add information to the position. The correct
prediction rate is such an obvious metric, but maybe prediction shouldn't
be improved at any price. To a certain degree, last move info is a kind of
Last move info is a cheap hint for an instable area (unless it is a defense
move).
Thomas
On Mon, 22 Dec 2014, Stefan Kaitschick wrote:
Last move info is a strange beast, isn't it? I mean, except for ko captures, it
doesn't really add information to the position. The
correct prediction rate
Hallo Robert,
In total: Changing the random move generator typically will
change the playing behaviour. However, it can not be well
predicted if this change will be to the better or to the
worse.
Is this prediction theoretically impossible (why, under exactly which
presuppositions)
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 03:45:47PM +0100, Stefan Kaitschick wrote:
Last move info is a strange beast, isn't it? I mean, except for ko
captures, it doesn't really add information to the position. The correct
prediction rate is such an obvious metric, but maybe prediction shouldn't
be improved
