Re: Fuseki and Joseki Database with Neural Network

[Juergen Kahnert <Kahnert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ok, i exaggerates with the used time span for the evaluation function.
;-)

But i think, the time will not be the main problem. Rather to find a
really good evaluation function which will work for genetic algorithm.
I mean, it is impossible to find one.
Why?
For GA we need a function with a steady course (i don't know if it is
the correct mathematical expression for a function without any 'jumps').
We need a function with minima and maxima. We are able to avoid to end
in a local maxima by vary the step width, but this requires such a
steady function.
And thats the problem. I think we can't find such a function because in
"go" it's possible a stone placed on a field maybe bad but the field
next to it could be very good. It is not a little bit better or
something like that, it could be like day and night. That produce a
'jump' in the function.
Now a generation near the best place would die because it's current
place is very bad. The solution is to make steps with one field, but
this means we have to try all the possible fields and this means the
advantage of GA is lost.

Maybe if have a wrong feeling with this, because i'm not very good in
the opening. But if there exists a function i'm not able to find it and
if someone is able to find such a function i think he or she will not
use GA because it's no more necessary... ;-)

So i come to the conclusion neither genetic algorithm nor neural network
is the correct way to do fuseki or joseki.
Do you accept with me?

	Juergen


PS: I have not heard of the GA software "SAMUEL".


Gary Boos wrote:
> 
> Ahh.  Good comment - I think you are normally correct.
> But isn't it true that if you need some level of accuracy (better
> than a NN would tend to give) and you can let you machine run
> for 10 -20 hours to produce the "solution" (what is the proper term ?)
> using the GA, wouldn't GA be better than NN?
> You suggested  "before the sun explodes" time span.  Is it that
> difficult to write an eval' function (and somehow limit the number of
> generations or mutations with each new generation) that a "solution"
> after 10-20 hours is feasible?
> 
> Please comment (though I would think this is covered in a basic
> commentary on the subject is a textbook).  You could just answer
> - give it a try and see how hard it is.
> 
> Thanks, Gary
> 
> BTW have you heard of the GA software "SAMUEL" ?