Interesting.
I'm currently trying to find some correlation between playing strength
and average chain size. I'm using random player as a baseline and
then doing very weak MC as the stronger player. To get anything more
than two chains at the end of almost every game, you have to go up to
about
But note that I said passing was disallowed so he would have no choice. In
a percolation simulation, you can have quasi-stable regions. To follow the
analogy for go, you could have situations where each color was trading small
regions back and forth, like trading kos or 2 for 1 trades. Even
This looks like the only plausible precondition: given a board of n points, n-1
are filled with the same color, and the opposing player plays the nth point,
capturing the lot. Hopefully, any player of modest skill would not fill the
penultimate eye of his own group.
Terry McIntyre
From: Chris
5/ Percolation: I tend to think of some dynamical systems (like
spin-glasses) as naturally moving toward a static end-state where every cell
is frozen (e.g up or down, black or white). (This is generally a good
property for go games to have too.) But some systems just keep going. As you
bring wate
>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: computer-go@computer-go.org
>Sent: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 12:03 AM
>Subject: Re: [computer-go] Big board, ++physics
>
>Your analogy with physics encourage me to share other physical analogies.
>1/ Cooling the simulation could be done by control
I've started playing with this too. It may be a missing piece to a puzzle
that interests me. I doubt anyone with a background in fractals could look at a
go board and not see something there.
I'm comparing "light" MC playouts (pure random, non-eyefilling) and
"heavy" (it tries to fin
On 23, Feb 2007, at 1:44 AM, Sylvain Gelly wrote:
The difference is small, and only the renormalizations that would show
any real differences.
http://www.lri.fr/~gelly/res_0.pbm
http://www.lri.fr/~gelly/res_1.pbm
http://www.lri.fr/~gelly/res_2.pbm
http://www.lri.fr/~gelly/res_3.pbm
http://www
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 22:17 +0900, igo wrote:
> > Making the board bigger would probably make the game weaker for humans.
> > I presume the day a computer is world champion,
> > increasing board size would give the computer even more advantage.
> > (Againstthe common search-width based intuition
> Making the board bigger would probably make the game weaker for humans.
> I presume the day a computer is world champion,
> increasing board size would give the computer even more advantage.
> (Againstthe common search-width based intuition.)
I presume exact the opposite way.
The day a com
The number of liberties is not the same measure as dimensionality.
You need to look at a area/boundary ratio.
At some point I adapted libEGO to hexagonal topology, and the game -
Hex Go ( Ho? :-) )
was actually very interesting. Major features are:
- almost no capture tactics
- no ko
- a lot of
Ray Tayek wrote:
it's also hard to see why 21x21 would be boring (i
can see 17x17 being too simple in some sense).
There is also the length of a game. 21x21 is 22% bigger
in terms of cells. Professional players can work two
days on a 19x19 game. Making the board bigger would
probably make th
On Thu, Feb 22, 2007 at 07:19:52PM -0600, Matt Gokey wrote:
> Here is a thought experiment to test: define the board only logically
> using a graph (nodes and neighbor nodes). No topological shape and no
> mesh layout over any shape is needed. If all nodes have exactly four
> neighbors, there
Magnus Persson wrote:
> ... it is impossible to make eyes when attacks on the eyes
> has so many directions to escape. Every reasonable well
> played game will end in seki.
I totally agree. In 2D a free stone has 4 liberties. In 3D, 6. In nD, 2n.
The higher n, the less interesting. You could gi
On 2/22/07, Unknown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 17:50 +, Stuart A. Yeates wrote:
> Does anyone know of a document outlining the IGS protocol?
>
> There are a number of programs and servers which support the IGS
> protocol, including the IGS server. I am trying write a too
The difference is small, and only the renormalizations that would show
any real differences.
http://www.lri.fr/~gelly/res_0.pbm
http://www.lri.fr/~gelly/res_1.pbm
http://www.lri.fr/~gelly/res_2.pbm
http://www.lri.fr/~gelly/res_3.pbm
http://www.lri.fr/~gelly/res_4.pbm
so do you see something?
One question for both of you:
Are these the result of one random playout or are they from one
MC player playing against another (each using many playouts to
determine its move)?
Also one MC playout, for the same reason as Chris :-).
Sylvain
___
comp
16 matches
Mail list logo
