English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The results obtained by Pollack and Blair substantiallyunderperform my 1992 TD Learning results. This is shown bydirectly benchmarking the 1992 TD nets against Pubeval. Aplausible hypothesis for this underperformance is that, unlike TDlearning, the hillclimbing algorithm fails to capture nonlinearstructure inherent in the problem, and despite the presence ofhidden units, only obtains a linear approximation to the optimalpolicy for backgammon. Two lines of evidence supporting thishypothesis are discussed, the first coming from the structure ofthe Pubeval benchmark program, and the second coming fromexperiments replicating the Pollack and Blair results.

Comments on “Co-Evolution in the Successful Learning of Backgammon Strategy”