David Fotland wrote:
So I'm curious then. With simple UCT (no rave, no priors, no progressive
widening), many people said the best constant was about 0.45. What are the
new concepts that let you avoid the constant?
Actually it's closer to 0.46.
Just kidding, I have no idea. But great questions. Looking forward to the
answers.
Is it RAVE, because the information gathered during the search lets you
focus the search accurately without the UCT term? Many people have said
that RAVE has no benefit for them.
Do most of the strongest programs use RAVE? I think from Crazystone's
papers, that it does not use RAVE. Gnugomc does not use rave.
Is it the prior values from go knowledge, like opening books, reading
tactics before the search etc? Do all of the top programs have opening
books now? I know mogo does.
Do most of the top programs read tactics before the search? I know Aya
does.
Does it matter how prior values are used to guide the search? I think mogo
uses prior knowledge to initialize the RAVE values. Do other programs
include it some other way, by initializing the FPU value, or by initializing
the UCT visits and confidence, or some extra, "prior" term in the equation?
Are there other techniques (not RAVE) that people are using to get
information from the search to guide the move ordering? I think crazystone
estimates ownership of each point and uses it to set prior values in some
way.
Regards,
David
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
