[computer-go] 10k UCT bots

[Carter Cheng]

I assume this implies that there arent any open-source basic-UCT bots which utilize the basic eye rule and a simple permute and retry scheme as described by many ppl on the group? When we speak of these sorts of bots playing at about 10kyu I assume what is meant is 10kyu at 9x9 not 19x19.


--- On Wed, 5/14/08, dhillismail at netscape.net <dhillismail at netscape.net> wrote:

> From: dhillismail at netscape.net <dhillismail at netscape.net>
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] 10k UCT bots
> To: computer-go at computer-go.org
> Date: Wednesday, May 14, 2008, 10:44 AM
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jacques Basaldúa <jacques at dybot.com>
> > To: computer-go at computer-go.org
> > Sent: Wed, 14 May 2008 6:38 am
> > Subject: Re: [computer-go] 10k UCT bots
> 
> 
> > Don Dailey wrote: 
>  
> > > dhillismail at netscape.net wrote: 
>  
> > >> For those currently coding this up, I think
> the most important thing 
> >>>  about this playout algorithm is that it is 
> >> >  *temporary*. You will  almost certainly
> be replacing it with something different and better 
> >> > just a little bit down the road.  So you
> probably don't want to worry 
> >> > about hair-splitting tweaks except as an
> academic exercise. 
> 
> > Yes, I agree. Also my hair brained scheme of
> pre-generated tables of
> > > list traversal orderings was just an academic 
>  exercise as you say.  
> 
> > But the problem is that when you do heavy playouts you
> have the same 
> > problem except that the probabilities of the legal
> moves are no longer equal. 
> 
> The problem doesn't go away but the trade-offs change
> considerably. This is an interesting and relevant
> discussion, but if I were trying to code up light MC
> playouts for the first time, right now, I would be feeling
> that this dead-simple algorithm was actually very difficult
> and confusing. 
> 
> For someone in that position (and only them), my advice is
> 1. Implement light playouts first. It's simple; you
> will find many bugs that way; it's standardized enough
> that other people will understand what you're talking
> about; it's a fast way to get a basic bot; it will be a
> very handy thing to have as a baseline when you test other
> things.
> 2. Get it working the standard way before improving it.
> It's your baseline that you'll be testing
> improvements against.
> 3. Make it fast but don't spend excessive effort
> optimizing. "Better is the enemy of good
> enough." 
> 
> - Dave
> Hillis_______________________________________________
> computer-go mailing list
> computer-go at computer-go.org
> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/