[computer-go] 10k UCT bots

[Jason House]

On May 13, 2008, at 3:20 PM, Don Dailey <drdailey at cox.net> wrote:

>
>>>>
>>>> I don't care much about it being noticeable. This thread is about
>>>> putting bots on CGOS that use a reproducible algorithm, to help  
>>>> people
>>>> detect bugs in their implementations. As part of specifying what  
>>>> these
>>>> bots do, we should all pick the next move in a playout using the  
>>>> same
>>>> criteria. If we agree to use uniform distribution among empty
>>>> non-eyeish points, that's what should be implemented.
>>>>
>>> I agree with this.   If we get too clever we lose confidence that  
>>> we are comparing apples to apples by risking bugs and making  
>>> assumptions that may not hold.
>>
>>
>> I take an opposite approach: the data will tell us when we are  
>> comparing apples and oranges. It will help us identify the major  
>> factors leading to strength. There's probably more subtle variation  
>> than we realize...
>>
> But when someone is explicitly asking for a direct comparison,   you  
> don't want to just throw in your own magic and then try to sort it  
> out later.     You are probably looking for implementation bugs, not  
> implementation differences.   That has it's place but not in this  
> context.

Is this not in the context of the original post that started this  
thread? I thought I understood the OP pretty well...


> - Don
>
>
>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> - Don
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I would imagine moving an illegal point towards the end and only  
>>>>> start
>>>>> including it when the other 'legal' moves run out can lead to  
>>>>> terrible bias
>>>>> however because they may not remain illegal for very long and  
>>>>> actually
>>>>> become important points to play. A ko-point is probably the most  
>>>>> extreme
>>>>> example of that.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don't think you understood the algorithm. The eyeish point is
>>>> removed from the lottery only for picking this particular move, not
>>>> for the rest of the playout.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Anyway, I don't bother to order the empty-point-list or scramble  
>>>>> them in any
>>>>> way prior to the game. So the first point is the 1-1 point and  
>>>>> the last is
>>>>> the 19-19 point (or whatever boardsize you're playing) so I have  
>>>>> no qualms
>>>>> about those moves being a little less likely to be played. Or  
>>>>> even a lot
>>>>> less. I think it would actually be beneficial.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Reproducibility was the point, not strength of the bot.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> If this asymmetry really bothers you, you could very easily fix  
>>>>> this by
>>>>> wrapping the search around. There's no asymmetry in a circle.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That doesn't fix anything.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Álvaro.
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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/
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/