-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 David Fotland wrote: > I agree. Computer go needs someone who will play large tournaments are > publish results. I'm also curious how Many Faces would do against Mogo on > 19x19 in a long match. Mogo is much better at endgames, and is much > greedier, but Many Faces is much stronger tactically. Certainly if there > were ratings it would motivate me to work on Many Faces more. I think games > against mogo would help me find bugs in Many Faces. > > Are you volunteering? Is the 19x19 cgos still going? I could put Many > Faces on it if there is any interest. > > David
I believe Many Faces is probably stronger than Mogo but I don't know that this has been proven. But that's my point, I don't think anyone really knows for sure where any of the top programs really stand unless they know due to private testing on their own or anecdotal claims. But what I had in mind in some kind of ratings agency where the conditions are controlled and everything is completely open. Here is what is required: 1. Someone with at least 2 equal DEDICATED computers plus a server. 2. Someone willing to do the work. 3. Software to manage the testing. Anyone wishing to get on the "rating list" would have to submit a binary or executable of some kind to the "testing agency." Some kind of restriction concerning which programs get tested. With a limited resource testing agency you can't have hundreds of programs and versions being tested. Of course something like CGOS is simpler, but there is no way to verify what is being run and what hardware it is being run on. There is nothing to stop you from running Many Faces or some other program and claiming it is your program or running on an 8 processor system and claiming it's 1 processor. (although it often becomes obvious after some time. I suspect that if someone got Many Faces running you or someone else would be able to detect this sooner or later if you were paying attention.) Perhaps something like CGOS would be required to qualify. Get your program running well on CGOS, after so many games and a good rating you earn the right to submit a program to the agency. Or perhaps the agency evaluates any submitted programs and decides which ones get rated. The computers don't have to be equivalent either. But each machine/software combination has to be considered a separate identity. Example: 1. Many Faces version X running on core 2 duo e6700 2. Many Faces quad version X running on xyz and so on. Unfortunately, this does require some dedication on someones part and a bit of trust. All games should be public and so should the testing methodology, etc. My point is that this probably won't happen in computer Go but it happened long ago in computer chess. - - Don -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD4DBQFHDl48DsOllbwnSikRAmUCAJi5IoVkDQUrfHxPlEf4hNZh0OPTAJ9VlGoC +vQLi+uYD/w6u+soc5Z3bQ== =ylOv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
