[computer-go] Monte-Carlo Go Misnomer?

[dhillismail at netscape.net]

      I think of it as a continuum going from "light" to "heavy." Pure random playouts are the lightest. But then you add some rules about filling in eyes, then maybe discourage self-atari,... and the playouts keep getting heavier. I agree with you that the current crop of MC engines are not nearly as go-knowledge naive as the name implies.
 
- Dave Hillis
 
-----Original Message-----
From: mgokey at charter.net
To: computer-go at computer-go.org
Sent: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 11:22 PM
Subject: [computer-go] Monte-Carlo Go Misnomer?


Is MC Go a misnomer for programs in this genre not using simple random 
playouts and combining with other techniques like pattern matching? 
 
Technically, does the general Monte-Carlo method require random or 
pseudo-random sampling? 
 
If so, should we dub a new name for these non-random deep play-out 
sampling based go programs? Maybe Quasi-MC or Directed 
Sampling... 
 
_______________________________________________ 
computer-go mailing list 
computer-go at computer-go.org 
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ 
________________________________________________________________________
Check Out the new free AIM(R) Mail -- 2 GB of storage and industry-leading spam and email virus protection.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://computer-go.org/pipermail/computer-go/attachments/20070201/a9338c7c/attachment.htm