I have to correct this slightly.
Don Dailey wrote: > Just for fun I thought of a simple protocol for ending the game earlier > that I think would work: > > Each program, when it sends it's move to the server can optionally send > 2 lists of dead stones to the server. The first list represents the > status of the board BEFORE the move is played and the second list > represents the status of the stones AFTER the move is played. > > If the "after" list of the one player matches the "before" list of the > following player, the game is ended with the last 2 moves replaced by > pass moves. > Actually, the last player is assumed to pass and an additional pass is inserted for the first player. - Don > The lists are optional, so a program doesn't have to use this protocol > unless it wants to. The lists are also completely anonymous to the > opponent to avoid any gamesmanship. It doesn't change anything on > the server from the viewpoint of a program that doesn't want to use it. > > A program will not send this list unless it intends to pass and > considers the game played out. The agreed upon dead stones would be > removed and the game scored. > > - Don > > > > > > Don Dailey wrote: > >> David Fotland wrote: >> >> >>> Japanese rules. I know people on this list don't like them, but the game >>> plays out almost the same as with Chinese rules, but since there is a one >>> point penalty for playing inside your own territory, the game ends much >>> earlier. >>> >>> >>> >> The real issue on a server that involves computers is having a simple >> bullet-proof protocol for ending the game and getting the correct >> score. CGOS method is very clean, simple and correct. Computers >> don't have ego's and will not fight if they get cheated. On KGS when >> my bot played I got situations where my program won, but the opponent >> just marked all my programs stone as dead. KGS didn't have a protocol >> for contesting this. I didn't really care since the games were not >> rated but it was ugly nonetheless. >> >> I think KGS has something now involving sending a dead stone list to the >> server, but it's not perfect. Without a great deal of expertise and >> getting the protocol just right, games can get scored wrong. In >> fact, even with the best of intentions and well behaved strong programs >> I think it's possible to get some games scored incorrectly with Japanese >> rules and computer play automated. >> >> But for ending the game early, you have to get into this. I don't >> think it's a Japanese vs Chinese issue, but more about agreeing on dead >> stones. Although this is usually simple, there can be complicated >> cases that even a good program cannot score correctly. >> >> If I were to take it to the next step (which I'm not inclined to do) I >> would try to find a way to allow early passes. I think this is >> actually counter-productive though. It would make it more difficult >> to get on CGOS by raising the bar and I don't want that. >> >> - Don >> >> >> >> >> >>> David >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> This raises an interesting (to me) theoretical question: is there a >>>> ruleset that allows games to end in a more reasonable time without >>>> changing general play? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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/ > > _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
