3.1.3DC vs 3.1.3

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Revision as of 14 January 2014 at 00:03.
The highlighted comment was created in this revision.

3.1.3DC vs 3.1.3

Edited by author.
Last edit: 17:17, 25 December 2013

Which one is better Edit:found out that 3.1.3DC uses GoTo surfing

    Tmservo (talk)21:37, 24 December 2013

    Both 3.13 and 3.13DC use GoTo surfing. 3.13DC uses DC, while 3.13 uses some form of VCS. (Correct me if I am wrong)

      Straw (talk)23:16, 24 December 2013

      Correct :-) In the movement, to be more specific.

      And considering I write a changelog, I don't see how this question is anything other than lazy at its worst.

        Skilgannon (talk)07:04, 25 December 2013

        I was always wondering why the best bot used VCS, DC seems much more elegant. Does it improve performance in your tests?

          Straw (talk)08:05, 25 December 2013

          For some reason I've never managed to get the DC to perform as well as the VCS, so it still used VCS. I remember Jdev commenting that a range search worked better for him than a KNN search in movement, so I'll be trying that next.

            Skilgannon (talk)21:34, 25 December 2013

            Have you tried doing something similar to your many randomized attribute buffers with kD-Trees? You could make 100 trees, each with a random subset of the predictors, then combine the results. You could even start weighting some tree's results higher if they perform better.

              Straw (talk)00:36, 14 January 2014

              In my mind, a tree is more heavyweight than a buffer. You need multiple buffers to begin to approximate the smoothing you get from KNN and kernel density. I use multiple trees in my surfing for the same reasons, but more on the order of 10 than 100.

                Voidious (talk)01:03, 14 January 2014