David Doshay wrote: > I looked up borda voting on Wikipedia. I did not know this was called > Borda voting, and it might be called a zeroth-order version of what I > am thinking. Rather than just take rank order from each, I intended to > try to include other metrics, for example, some measure of distance > from top. One engine may evaluate that there is one really great move > with all others considered very bad. That is different than many nearly > equal good moves.
[Commenting a somewhat arbitrary message in the thread.] MonteGNU (and "gnugo --monte-carlo" in the next development release) is doing a simple form of voting. Internally there are two engines; one UCT-MC engine and the ordinary GNU Go move generation. The UCT engine is allowed to nominate a number of moves and the ordinary move generation must choose one of those. More specifically the UCT engine nominates the following moves: 1. The highest scoring move in terms of win rate. Let N be the number of simulations for this move. 2. All moves with more than N/2 simulations 3. All moves with win rate win rate greater than 0.9 and more than N/10 simulations. 4. All moves if the highest scoring move has win rate less than 0.1. The move values from the ordinary move generation are then used to choose one of the nominated moves. If all nominated moves are thought useless the highest scoring UCT move is chosen. Pass is generated if and only if the ordinary move generation wants to pass. Usually this works fairly well. Most of the strength (on 9x9) comes from the UCT part and if it finds a clear winner the ordinary move generation only has a single move to choose from. When safely ahead many moves are nominated and the ordinary move generation gets to play for points, providing sensibly looking moves. Similarly when clearly losing and resignation is disabled, ordinary move generation gets to finish the game off in a tidy manner. A nice point is that with too few simulations the UCT engine will nominate lots of moves and the total result is that it more or less reverts to the ordinary move generation. Occasionally, however, it gives the worst of two worlds. The UCT engine may have a good move A first but a bad move B close behind and also nominated . The ordinary move generation maybe likes another good move C best and hates B but has completely missed A. Then B will be played, although both engines prefer better moves. /Gunnar _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
