I'm not against any size, but I would like to have a temporary 7x7 server to start with.
One idea is to run only one server at a time (perhaps keeping 9x9 always active too.) We could even run each a month at a time and rotate through them. I would suggest we leave the 9x9 server alone - but rotate by month like so: January - 11x11 February - 13x13 March - 15x15 April - 17x17 May - 19x19 June - 21x21 July - back to 11x11 I'm only temporarily interested in 7x7. I don't want a permanent 7x7 server and probably wouldn't want to revisit it (unless it suddenly became interesting to the players with strong programs.) - Don On Sat, 2006-10-14 at 21:42 +0200, Benjamin Teuber wrote: > Hi, > > Why not just the sizes 9, 13 and 19? > I don't think so many different sizes are helpful in any way - besides, > there's enough work to be done to improve 9x9... > Scaling algorithms to massive parallel clusters is of more interest to > me, no matter on what board-size. > > Regards, > Benjamin > > David Doshay schrieb: > > Hello All, > > > > It is my belief that the next big advance in computer Go will > > come from an understanding of scaling relationships. With the > > recent advances in MC programs, there is plenty of interesting > > work to be done in how those programs will scale with more > > time and/or memory. > > > > My question to all of you is the level of your interest in scaling > > by board size. > > > > In order to help this effort, I am considering extending Don's > > wonderfully helpful cgos by running servers at increasingly > > larger board sizes. The obvious steps are the odd numbers > > starting at 11 and increasing up towards 19, but I fear that > > having too many cgosNxN servers will thin out participation > > on each of the servers. The thing that makes the present 9x9 > > server so useful is the number of opponents that are available > > at any time, and already I sometimes wish that I saw one or > > two specific opponents available when their programmers do > > not have them up and running. > > > > Is there interest? Do enough of you have sufficient computer > > resources to play on several size boards at the same time? > > There is no sense in having multiple versions of cgosNxN > > unless there is a steady supply of a variety of programs. > > > > Cheers, > > David > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > computer-go mailing list > > computer-go@computer-go.org > > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > computer-go mailing list > computer-go@computer-go.org > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
