[computer-go] transposition

[Peter Drake]

I didn't notice much improvement in Orego, because the tree is pretty  
shallow. Of course, now that I've made speed improvements to the  
program (and bought a faster computer), and now that I understand the  
sum-of-children thing, the rules may have changed...

Peter Drake
http://www.lclark.edu/~drake/



On May 11, 2007, at 6:15 AM, Erik van der Werf wrote:

> On 5/11/07, Chris Fant <chrisfant at gmail.com> wrote:
>> How much improvement should one see in a UCT program after adding a
>> transposition table?
>
> Hard to say in general because this depends on how deep the tree goes,
> the allocated search time, etc. For shallow trees I suspect that you
> might even play worse because the amount of transpositions is low and
> the UCT move selection becomes more costly. It would be interesting to
> hear some experiences from someone who's tested this in a
> state-of-the-art UCT program.
>
> Erik
> _______________________________________________
> computer-go mailing list
> computer-go at computer-go.org
> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://computer-go.org/pipermail/computer-go/attachments/20070511/931d6e18/attachment.htm