Suggestion: Let a strong bot play against itself, let one bot play freely, for tha other bot let the fist 15 or so moves be played by the strongest human you can get.
Prediction: The freely playing side with the 'bad' opening will win on average. Explanation: As mentioned before, whether a move is good or not depends a lot on the ability to handle the resulting situations. Bots are strong in all board unbiased evaluation and not so good in precise end game for which you need extra knowledge. Therefore a bot can handle all board fighting positions better than very territorial solid play which is why bots play the opening as they play it. Extension: Vary the number of human initial moves to get extra insight. Thomas On Thu, 5 Jun 2014, Marc Landgraf wrote:
I fully agree, that there is almost no difference between playing whatever move first. Or even some joseki choices. I never argued about the game being decided in middlegame. But move 50 is much more then that. Or would you argue, that a Cho Chikun position looks the same as a Takemiya position? And in fact, I think, that low territorial games should be much easier to evaluate for MC-Bots and thus lead to an even stronger play. Pretty much like those Lee Changho games in the 90's. But the Bots are deluded by the Fata Morgana of huge moyos and will never get to such a position. We don't know how Bots perform on those positions, because they simply never happen. And such tests could actually show, if there is a potential improvement of the bots, when giving them some different starting position into the middle game. If there is not... well there is no reason to even try to enable the bots to play more human-like openings. But if it shows, that Bots can activate their inner Lee Changho, once given a position that enables them to show it... Well, it may be worth it to look deeper. But until now I have only seen attempts to model such openings in various way, but they didn't result in anything overwhelming. But we have no idea if it is because the bots simply didn't play the opening well or if it does not suit their style later. And that is all I wan to know. 2014-06-05 7:56 GMT+02:00 Petri Pitkanen <[email protected]>: My hypothesisi is that weird opening is not good or bad objectively, but works because it matches the playing style of moves to come. And small differences in opening do not matter much as it is the middle game that sets players a part. Difference in points between 3-4 and 10-4 as 1st move is probably way below one, and in any middle game fights difference between good and almost good moves is almost always more than 10 points. So good or bad opening is something that will be an issue once bots are playing pro's with 1-2 stone handicap. In chess I notices load of player buy and read opening books while at they skill level they hardly ever meet an opponent that will play a know opening past move six. And they lose and win games on dropped pieces on fine nuances of strategy. Similarly in go loads of people study joseki and lose games on not reading medium hard tsume-go situations correctly Petri 2014-06-04 15:51 GMT+03:00 Marc Landgraf <[email protected]>: Hi,another idea crossed my mind lately. We see a lot of Bots play rather unconventional fuseki. Sadly it looks difficult to know, if those are actually a weakness or a strength of certain bots as our human judgement is not perfectly accurate here either. Thus I would love to see some games, in which the game is not started on an empty board, but on positions from professional games at around move 50 or 60. (the position of course should be not known to the bot before, so no preanalysis) For fairness reasons the players of course have to play it twice with alternating colors to prevent any potential advantage from the given board position. It would be interesting to see, if those Bot fuseki are actually playing into the bots strengths or if they are handicapping the bot, as they would do better with conventional openings, but are just unable to play them. Of course, the best would be, if it would be possible to somehow test it against humans of appropriate level, but I'm not sure, how this could be done. But even some sort of bot tourney with this mode would probably be interesting, even though it would not tell us, what I described above, but still the comparison to a normal tourney may tell something about strengths of certain bots. Same could be also done with endgame positions, but finding endgame positions that are challenging for the bots without being predecided on their level is probably rather difficult. _______________________________________________ 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
