If you come up with any good ideas on how to do that, please share :) While existing engines don't differentiate between the quality of a win, there are some ways that additional information is extracted from playouts. Off the top of my head: 1. RAVE/AMAF: Identify effective moves inside playouts. This can turn up surprising moves that don't fit expected patterns. 2. Last good reply - Finds counter moves to certain attacks for use inside playouts 3. Criticality - I may have the term wrong, but I think Remi correlated ownership of certain board areas with winning the game 4. Score - Most engines discard this (improves strength), but mild use of this can yield more natural games. Fuego has an option to do this.
On Apr 1, 2013, at 3:08 PM, "Gabriel .Santos" <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Aja. > > I was just wondering if it is possible to get more relevant information from > the playouts and take advantage of that. > =D. > > > On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Aja Huang <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> 2013/4/1 Gabriel .Santos <[email protected]> >>> 3 - I guess you misunderstood my idea of "think", or perhaps i just choose >>> the wrong word. By the question that I raise, i mean, how anyone say that >>> one state is better than another one if they have the same winrate in MC >>> methods. How could the machine determine this ? >> >> If one of the states has more trials than the other, then the machine >> determines it is better with higher confidence. >> >> Aja >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Computer-go mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go > > _______________________________________________ > Computer-go mailing list > [email protected] > http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
_______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
