On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 6:35 PM, Michael Williams < [email protected]> wrote:
> I think the computers will improve more than John during the course of the > next year. Progress has been rapid recently. > I agree with that, but saying that is not proof that it will be better than John in 1 year since we don't really know how strong it is compared to John based on 3 games. I typical run 50,000 games matches to "prove" a single change in my world class chess program and I can tell you that 3 games is a complete JOKE in the context of evaluating a player (or the relative strength of 2 players.) I'm not saying it was not useful or that it was not fun, it was. I'm not even saying that we should not replace John, Zen's fine result with the 5 dan performance with fast games gives us some a priori reason to get a stronger player for the next time. However I think based on the time control differences that Zen is not very close to 5 dan at this level and it's bit unsatisfying to draw strong conclusions based on 3 games. Don > > > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 3:56 PM, Don Dailey <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I know that everyone at this point thinks John is all washed up for this >> kind of match, but I don't agree. >> >> Basically we have concluded based on a mere 3 games that John Tromp was >> "crushed" by the computer as if there was no hope had the match continued. >> If the first 2 games had been a loss but John had won the last game, >> we probably would be viewing it slightly more rationally - as John having a >> chance. >> >> It's probably not very practical for logistical reasons, but a match >> like this should really played with a lot more than 3 games. This was >> fun, but only proved what we already knew and nothing more - that >> computers are now dan players. >> >> A ten game match also would not be enough, but it would certainly be far >> better for a more educated guess about reasonable expectations. Would it >> have been 9 to 1? Would it have been a close match? >> >> Imagine that both John and the computer were perfect evenly matched with >> each having a 50/50 change of winning each game. The likely score would >> have been 2-1 with a 3-0 quite possible too, despite perfect equality of >> the players and yet we are acting almost as if this was clear proof that >> John is washed up and can no longer compete. Had John won 2-1 how >> would we be talking about this? Probably we would be saying that >> computers still have a long way to go while criticizing or laughing at some >> of it's "gaffes." >> >> So seriously, let's not make more of this than it actually is. >> >> Don >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 12:20 AM, Michael Williams < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> John, thank you for doing this! But with all due resepect, you have >>> been eclipsed and we need a new challenger. For next year (or whenever) I >>> hope that person is as reasonable and sane as John has been. Not everyone >>> is cut out for the quirks of the man-machine matches. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 12:02 AM, Darren Cook <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> > (i) MC winning percentages (by Many Faces of Go) >>>> > http://www.althofer.de/zen-tromp-04-percents.jpg >>>> > >>>> > (ii) Traditional territory scores (by Many Faces of Go) >>>> > http://www.althofer.de/zen-tromp-02-territory.jpg >>>> >>>> I think that 2nd link should have been: >>>> http://www.althofer.de/zen-tromp-04-territory.jpg >>>> >>>> (but, in his defense, Ingo was posting at 5am :-) >>>> >>>> Darren >>>> http://dcook.org/gobet/ >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Darren Cook, Software Researcher/Developer >>>> >>>> http://dcook.org/work/ (About me and my work) >>>> http://dcook.org/blogs.html (My blogs and articles) >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Computer-go mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Computer-go mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Computer-go mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Computer-go mailing list > [email protected] > http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >
_______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
