On Sun, 2008-11-30 at 14:33 -0800, terry mcintyre wrote: > > ----- Original Message ---- > > From: Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > MCTS really feels to me like a superb book building algorithm. > > Computer Chess books (at least the automated part) are built essentially > > by taking millions of games from master play and picking out the ones > > that seem to work best. Those games are like playouts. The moves > > that score the best are played the most. We have a kind of MCTS here. > > > Interesting, the book moves are not generated by random playouts, but by > professional ( or highly skilled ) players.
Many chess opening books are created by a statistical analysis of lots of human games. Some books are created by hand. Very tediously. Even the ones created with the aid of human games are sometimes modified by hand, at least the top notch books. But in the context of this discussion we note that books can and are created solely from databases of top quality games. You can get a reasonable book that way. > In the Chess world, what is meant by "picking out the ones that seem to work > best?" What I mean is that you look at the statistics of the moves and base your opening book on the moves that gave the best results. You can also go by the moves that are played the most - with the assumption that if they are played a lot they must be good. It is typical to do a combination of both - if it's played a lot and also scores good, use it. I think some have tried mini-max too. It's possible that a move seems to has great success in general, but not if it's responded to in a certain way. It could be that in recent months or years a refutation has been found, and that a move that used to work really well has been found to be bad. > > My impression is that computer go programs do not, at this stage in their > evolution, make good use of professional book moves; too much professional > knowledge is actually in the part of the tree which is almost never played in > pro-pro games - the "how to beat up on mistakes" and "what not to do when > playing against a pro" parts of the tree. Even in chess, despite the awesome strength of the programs, human knowledge of the openings still reigns supreme, although it's now the case that computers are helping to build opening theory by finding new moves - in chess these are called "theoretical novelties" and computers have produced many of them from what I understand. - Don > > > _______________________________________________ > computer-go mailing list > computer-go@computer-go.org > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
