You can read about some such novelties found using Rybka here:
http://www.rybkachess.com/index.php?auswahl=Rybka+3+book
Don Dailey wrote:
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/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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/
