[computer-go] 10k UCT bots

[Jason House]

On May 14, 2008, at 3:39 PM, Jeff Nowakowski <jeff at dilacero.org> wrote:

> The 10k refers to ten thousand playouts, not rank, and yes it's  
> 9x9.  As
> for open source UCT, off the top of my head there's libego (C++) and
> Orego (Java).

HouseBot is open source too (D). I really should add the random  
resampling move selector as an option to my bot. It's really easy to  
implement, I've even done it before...



>
> -Jeff
>
> On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 12:14 -0700, Carter Cheng wrote:
>> 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/
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/