[computer-go] Hello / Pondering

[Don Dailey]

There are a lot of experts here on computer chess.    The answer is that
method A is overwhelming favorite of chess programs and as far as I know
a better way to take advantage of the opponents time has not been found.

The branching factor in chess is more like 6 and with all the selectivty
being used it's effectively much less than that.   

This doesn't mean method A is best for UCT go programs and that's why I
checked it out pretty well.   At least for Lazarus method A is better.
I really wanted to use method B (probably because it was different from
the same old thing I was used to in chess) but I am an engineer and I do
what works even if I don't like it as much.

- Don



On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 09:36 -0400, Jason House wrote:
> 
> 
> On 5/1/07, Joel Veness <jveness at gmail.com> wrote:
>         My intuition suggests that b) is the better approach, but I
>         know that
>         a) works much better in computer chess.
> 
> 
> Does anyone know why a works much better in computer chess?  Does the
> benefits of a correct guess (and thinking more deeply than the
> opponent) outweigh the benefits of having a little bit of extra
> thought about the move they chose?  I think I've heard that chess has
> a branching factor of 8.  In special scenarios where the (1-ply)
> branching factor is lower, does the best choice change? 
> _______________________________________________
> computer-go mailing list
> computer-go at computer-go.org
> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/