Olivier Teytaud wrote:
For people requesting mogoRelease3 without the bug for long computation
times due to a float instead of a double:
http://www.lri.fr/~teytaud/mogo (32 bits version, with double instead of
float)
http://www.lri.fr/~teytaud/mogo64 (64 bits version, double al
For people requesting mogoRelease3 without the bug for long computation
times due to a float instead of a double:
http://www.lri.fr/~teytaud/mogo (32 bits version, with double instead of
float)
http://www.lri.fr/~teytaud/mogo64 (64 bits version, double also)
Jus
Le vendredi 8 février 2008, terry mcintyre a écrit :
> Probably true, but I am already running into RAM
> limits with big_Mogo18 - had to halve the number of
> instances of the autotest program, and am installing
> RAM in the next few days to alleviate this problem.
> There is also the time-per-gam
Hi David,
On Fri, Feb 8, 2008 at 6:09 PM, David Silver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Note as well that the current implementation of MoGo (not the one at
> > the time of the ICML paper) use a different tradeoff between UCT and
> > Rave value, thanks to an idea of David Silver, which brought
>
I think it is time to share this idea with the world :-)
The idea is to estimate bias and variance to calculate the best combination
of UCT and RAVE values.
I have attached a pdf explaining the new formula.
It is written in the pdf file that the formula is the one in MoGo;
but in MoGo there's
Thank you very much, Silver. Interesting report!
-Hideki
David Silver: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Hi all,
>
>On 7-Feb-08, at 1:30 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Note as well that the current implementation of MoGo (not the one at
>> the time of the ICML paper) use a different tradeoff between UCT
David Silver wrote:
I think it is time to share this idea with the world :-)
Great. Thanks for sharing.
Rémi
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Why are m and n different? Isn't every playout used both to update the UCT
win rate and the RAVE values for the same nodes? Won't the number of UCT
simulations and the number of RAVE simulations be the same?
Each playout is used both to update the UCT win rate and the RAVE
values for the same
