Olivier Teytaud: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> That translates to mean that MoGo no longer uses upper confidence >> bounds, and only uses means. It also means that MoGo will _never_ >> explore improbable children (after a few sims) unless the RAVE value >> yields an unusually high estimate for it. Is all of that correct? >> > >Precisely: I don't see why you would be wrong, but empirically for 9x9, >we have played games against high-level humans and for the (few :-) ) >games that mogo lost, we tried to see which moves were erroneously chosen >by mogo; if we restart mogo at the same position with a huge >computation time (30 minutes of a fast octocore) mogo always changed his >mind and moves to a better move.
Could we look at some of the records of the games? -Hideki >So: >- theoretically, I don't see any reason for mogo to be asymptotically > consistent >- there are long computation times during which mogo focuses on a bad > move >- however, we have not seen a case of bad move for which mogo keeps > this move in case of _very_ long computation times > >==> if someone beats the release MoGoR3 with > very large computation times (time x nbcores = 4h, 1 to 4 cores) > I'm interested in the sgf file and the analysis >_______________________________________________ >computer-go mailing list >computer-go@computer-go.org >http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kato) _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
