[Pachi] [Computer-go] MCTS and perfect endgame
jloup at gailly.net
Sun Jul 3 20:22:11 CEST 2011
> Of course I am always willing to be proven wrong.
I want to prove you right, not wrong :-) I like your idea. I am just careful
because I had so many excellent ideas that turned out to weaken pachi...
2011/7/3 Leon Matoh <leon.matoh at guest.arnes.si>
> On 07/03/2011 06:45 PM, Jean-loup Gailly wrote:
> > Suppose you have 5 valid point which lead to same result r.
> > No matter how you play your winning percentage is (r-a)/ (b-a)
> > where a lower bound of random komi, b upper bound of random komi, r is
> fixed result
> > And (b-r)/(b-a) for opponent of course.
> This is true only if a <= r <= b. You select moves with higher r, which is
> what the parameter val_scale does. The cutoff b is similar to the
> current parameter val_points. The question is which heuristic is better,
> and this can only be determined by experiments.
> Those are two completly different things.
> First a<= r <= b is always true so there is no cutoff and almost no noise
> Second result is win/loss ratio and goes to the root. result is always in
> certain bounds.
> Third winrate is accurate description of point value.
> Fourth solution is clean, short and fast, no more than 20 lines of code
> Experiments would confirm something if you can play lost game till the end
> and won game perfectly.
> I am by definition a Lazy Programmer. Never write more code than needed to
> get optimum.
> By heart I am mathematician and exact proof and elegant solution are my
> And of course I am doer. It does the job.
> Of course I am always willing to be proven wrong. Som I can learn
> There is plenty mathematicians in go circles. Maybe somebody can help
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pachi