I agree that MCTS is a good term. Lukasz Lew
On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 13:21, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Rémi Coulom wrote: >> >> Don Dailey wrote: >>> >>> >>> I hate to keep calling this MC-UCT because many programs do not use UCT >>> so until we come up with better terminology I'm going to call it MC-BFS for >>> Monte Carlo with Best First Search. >> >> I think "Monte Carlo Tree Search" is a good name. The University of >> Maastricht people consistently call it MCTS in their papers. I like it much >> better than MC-UCT, or UCT-like. MC-BFS has the merit of being a little more >> precise, and maybe would exclude alpha-beta with MC evaluation. But it >> sounds a little complicated to me. So I'd vote for MCTS. >> > Yes, of course. I had forgotten about that term, but it fits perfectly. > It's ok that MCTS is a little more general since the whole idea is to > find a term to use when generalizing. Certainly alpha/beta is related. > People will distinguish when it's needed. > - Don > > > >> Rémi >> _______________________________________________ >> computer-go mailing list >> computer-go@computer-go.org >> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ >> > _______________________________________________ > computer-go mailing list > computer-go@computer-go.org > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ > _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
