So far on 9x9 go, Many Faces doesn't seem to make a huge difference. On 19x19 it makes a huge difference. I ran test games overnight against Gnugo. With Many Faces turned on, my engine wins 85%. With many Faces turned off, my engine wins 7%.
Both results are unexpected. Since most of my tuning is on 19x19, the combination of Many Faces and UCT is probably badly mistuned for 9x9. David > -----Original Message----- > From: computer-go-boun...@computer-go.org [mailto:computer-go- > boun...@computer-go.org] On Behalf Of David Fotland > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 10:58 PM > To: 'computer-go' > Subject: RE: [computer-go] Progressive widening vs unpruning > > I'm trying an experiment. I took the Many Faces code completely out of > the > engine, and put it on 9x9 cgos as mfgo-none-1c. It's faster without Many > Faces, but it's just a basic uct engine with medium playouts. This should > tell us how much benefit I get from the Many Faces knowledge. > > David > > > > > I recall that you credited the use of Many Faces rules with a massive > > improvement against GnuGo, so the technique is certainly empirically > > justified. > > > > But I am wondering how it achieves its results. That is, what do you > think > > the difference is, compared to standard unpruning? > > > _______________________________________________ > 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/
