[computer-go] Technical Report on MoGo

[Chrilly]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "House, Jason J." <jhouse at mitre.org>
To: <sylvain.gelly at m4x.org>; "computer-go" <computer-go at computer-go.org>
Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 8:10 PM
Subject: RE: [computer-go] Technical Report on MoGo


I'd be a bit more careful about the comparison with alpha-beta in
section 2.3.  I believe that iterative deepening of alpha-beta is very
common.  It can be argued that when iterative deepening is used, an
early termination isn't very detrimental.  I've seen people get
completely turned off to a paper simply because they compare their
carefully optimized results to a poor implementation of some other
algorithm (ie. alpha beta).

Alpha-Beta is for practical reasons of course also an anytime algorithm. In 
chess one does not send the first iterations to the GUI, because showing the 
result in the GUI is slower than the calculation of the engine. And the user 
would not notice it anyway, its too fast. My reaction when I read this 
statement was: "iterative deepening is not yet invented in the Go 
community".
But Alpha-Beta is not a continous algorithm. If one searches to depth k, the 
nodes till the first move at depth k+1 is completly searched  have no 
additional information. Usually one does some estimates beforehand if it 
pays to search for another iteration.

Chrilly





-----Original Message-----
From: computer-go-bounces at computer-go.org
[mailto:computer-go-bounces at computer-go.org] On Behalf Of
sylvain.gelly at m4x.org
Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 6:03 PM
To: computer-go at computer-go.org
Subject: [computer-go] Technical Report on MoGo

Hello all,

as perhaps some of you may be interested, I give here a link to a
technical
report about MoGo. You can find there a lot of details about the ideas
around
MoGo. While we tried to be as clear as possible, some details may lack.
There
is still no "number" on this report, but this will come in a few days.

http://hal.inria.fr/inria-00117266

I would like to thank of course all the authors, but also Rémi Coulom
who
shared a lot of details about CrazyStone and his ideas. I also would
like to
thank all the contributors in this list for interesting discussions.

Now my feeling is that the "improving random simulations" part of this
work is
promising. We have only done very few steps in this direction, and it
gives
quite convincing results. It was what I meant in the "random
distribution"
discussions we have in this list. I am pretty sure that making
improvements
in this direction would increase a lot the level of MC players even (or

especially) in 19x19. And this can be done very soon (well, perhaps not

before sunday :)).

Sylvain

_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go at computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go at computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/