> -Original Message-
> From: Jason House <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: computer-go
> Sent: Thu, 6 Dec 2007 4:44 pm
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Re: evaluating monte carlo results
> On Dec 6, 2007 4:22 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > My pr
On Dec 6, 2007 4:22 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> My program is riddled with code to try and make use of this. (It's always
> bothered me that UCT relies on the standard deviation of (often) multi-modal
> distributions.) It hasn't made my engine any stronger but it has helped me
> understand
-
From: Dave Dyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: computer-go
Sent: Thu, 6 Dec 2007 3:13 pm
Subject: [computer-go] Re: evaluating monte carlo results
At 11:39 AM 12/6/2007, terry mcintyre wrote:
>Any estimate of winning probability is only as good as the estimates of
>whether
particular
At 11:39 AM 12/6/2007, terry mcintyre wrote:
>Any estimate of winning probability is only as good as the estimates of
>whether particular games are actually won or lost.
I propose that monte carlo programs should produce a distribution of
quantitative outcomes rather than just a simple %win. It'
