On Wed, Feb 28, 2007 at 09:28:37AM +0100, Magnus Persson wrote: > >I have never really understood the idea in all-in-first. > > Actually early in the game the order of random moves does not matter. The > Sequence AbCdE... have same result if for example A and C switch order for > CbAdE... If the sequence is a win then standard MC will attribute this to > playing A first, but actually the sequence with move C first would also have > been a victory. hence all moves in the sequence could in theory be > reinforced.
I buy that for the first moves. But every game ends in filling points at the edge, and giving them equal value to the opening moves sounds counter-intuitive to me. Perhaps, if the weight given to a move would decrease in proportion to how far ahead the move is, or something similar. Actually, I think my ownership map could be used to do a comparable job - it also records where the stones ended in the game, which is a good approximation of what moves have been played. Not quite sure how to use it, yet. -H -- Heikki Levanto "In Murphy We Turst" heikki (at) lsd (dot) dk _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
