> I think they will play very strong. Sofar all my tests indicates nice > scaling, but I admit I have not tried a proper experiment for a long time > since I do not have any extra hardware. Perhaps the Mogo team could do >something but the problem is that Mogo is so strong it would beat most >programs 100% with modest increases in computation time on 9x9.
What we can say from experiments is that the scaling with time is very good with few simulations, but becomes less interesting with a lot of simulations. With the same settings (not the best, but the ones for which we have the most number of results), against gnugo at level 0 (s/m == simulations/move): 3000 s/m : 35%, 10000 s/m : 60%, 70000 s/m : 90%. Against gnugo at level 8 (default) it gives respectively 50% and 80% for 10k s/m and 70k s/m. MoGo on cgos plays with something like 300k s/m, but I don't think it is much better than with 70 k s/m. Quick experiments showed that the improvement was only few % against gnugo. However, I saw that the improvement is larger against MC based programs (classical non transitivity of the results), and against itself it is huge. I also saw that after each improvement, the number of simulations was less important than before, so the scaling is less impressive. Perhaps it comes from the fact that now the opening moves are those where MoGo loses most of its games and, as Magnus said, the number of simulations are not so important in the opening. We did not investigate that. Sylvain _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
