Yes. I think it's a good idea, but the devil is in the details. I've become pretty disenchanted with trying to use 3x3 or 5x5 patterns. Currently, I have about 300 1x1 patterns (I call them context codes) that I'm playing around with.
You can also do the same for RAVE without needing any more memory. You only adjust the RAVE values, at a node, after filtering out moves, in the playouts, that don't match the context/pattern for that position at that node. - Dave Hillis -----Original Message----- From: Michael Williams <michaelwilliam...@gmail.com> To: computer-go <computer-go@computer-go.org> Sent: Mon, Jun 22, 2009 3:02 pm Subject: Re: [computer-go] 1x1 patterns?! I had never considered using AMAF with larger pattern. That's an interesting idea. Perhaps a 5-vertex cross-shaped pattern or a 3x3 pattern. Has anyone tried this?? ? Magnus Persson wrote:? > Probably 1x1 patterns implies that different priorities are assigned to > the > absolute position of empty moves. AMAF can be seen this way. AMAF > learns > statistics of 1x1 patterns if the move is played in the playout > but ignores > all information surrounding the move at the time it is > played. Another > example would be to have lower priorities for the moves > at the first and > second line.? > > -Magnus? > > Quoting Peter Drake <dr...@lclark.edu>:? > >> I've seen reference in some papers to 1x1 patterns. What does that even? >> mean? A point is either black, white, or vacant, and it's illegal to? >> play there unless it's vacant.? > > _______________________________________________? > computer-go mailing list? > computer...@computer-go.org? > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/? > ? _______________________________________________? computer-go mailing list? computer...@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/
