> Can anyone share their estimates of RAM used per 100k playouts, or
> other appropriate measure?
As part of my study of libego I've had the same question.
100K playouts (from an empty board) creates an UCT tree of around 21,000
nodes, which is using 795K. The node class uses 20 bytes, which is
g
>> >MINIGO ICHIBAN SHOUBU would be a reading of Japanese .
>> >(Translation would be "Mini go sudden death".)
>> Are you kidding? "ICHIBAN SHOUBU" means one game match.
>
> Eh, doesn't "sudden death" mean "one game match" in English?
Sudden death means that as soon as one scores a point/go
>> The best source of 9x9 professional games is the Mini-go TV series,
>> which finished a few years back, but should have close to 700 games if
>> you can track down the complete set.
>
> Where would one begin to track down this show?
Others have already given the main links. While hunting for
The next US Go Congress will be held July 28 - August 4, 2007, in
Lancaster, Pennsylvania:
http://congress.usgo.org/
Is anyone else planning to attend?
I would, at the very least, like to gather a casual meeting of Go
programmers.
It might also be interesting (and a good media opportunity
Let's add byo yomi time. So it would be
1. For test games the match time is 10 min.each plus 5 min for 25 stones byo
yomi. The rank and results obtained are not recognized as representing the
computer state of the art.
2. For non tournament matches the time is set as 20 min. each plus 5 min for
[EMAIL PROTECTED]: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Remi,
>
>Could you change your time as 10 min. plus 8 min. byo yomi? Otherwise it's too
>short for
>human. It's difficult to get a real results.
Strogly agree! It's too short for me, 4 kyu, to have a meaningful
game with Crazy Stone. I beg you too, Remi.
>MINIGO ICHIBAN SHOUBU would be a reading of Japanese .
>(Translation would be "Mini go sudden death".)
Are you kidding? "ICHIBAN SHOUBU" means one game match.
Eh, doesn't "sudden death" mean "one game match" in English?
And I know how to read Japanese, thank you.
--
Seo Sanghyeon
_
On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 09:28 -0700, terry mcintyre wrote:
> byo yomi is probably an advantage for a computer program. As long as
> one's move is made within the byo yomi period, one may continue
> playing indefinitely. If a UCT program plays a "good enough" move just
> before the flag drops, this wi
On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 18:37 +0200, Rémi Coulom wrote:
> byoyomi on KGS has this problem:
> http://computer-go.org/pipermail/computer-go/2006-February/004317.html
> I believe 10 min / game is a usual time control for humans (that's
> how
> we play blitz at my Go club). It is an advantage for the bo
Sanghyeon Seo: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> > >The best source of 9x9 professional games is the Mini-go TV series,
>> > >which finished a few years back, but should have close to 700 games if
>> > >you can track down the complete set.
>> > Where would one begin to track down this show?
>> http://home.ww
On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 10:56:59AM -0400, Don Dailey wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 10:38 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I don't like byo yomi either for computers. Is there a kind of time
> control
> that simply adds n seconds to each move? Here is an example: You
> start
> with 5 minutes,
I recently found that the output from time_left looks identical for main
time and byo yomi time. Both give zero stones remaining. I did discover
that "time_left 0 0" is sent when main time runs out and byo yomi begins. I
didn't check if that occurs after each byo yomi period is lost as well.
T
Don Dailey wrote:
On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 11:18 -0400, Jason House wrote:
Not having byo yomi because it's tough to code isn't really a good
argument. If we want (non-computer-go) people to take the results
seriously, the game timing should be the same as what people naturally
do. I personall
On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 10:38 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I noticed that GnuGo is alsousing 10 min.time limit. People's
> complaining about Crazystone's time can be viewed as the program is
> getting better.
>
> GnuGo uses 10 min time limit. It's short for serious human games. I
> think part
byo yomi is probably an advantage for a computer program. As long as one's move
is made within the byo yomi period, one may continue playing indefinitely. If a
UCT program plays a "good enough" move just before the flag drops, this will
keep human opponents under a great deal of pressure.
I am
But there is another way to make it pay off more reasonably. After you
make a move, kill all the siblings and start thinking as if you were
the opponent. Then when it's your turn again, prune the tree again
to the relevant branches. Then you will get a modest improvement.
This is what my
On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 11:18 -0400, Jason House wrote:
> Not having byo yomi because it's tough to code isn't really a good
> argument. If we want (non-computer-go) people to take the results
> seriously, the game timing should be the same as what people naturally
> do. I personally am hesitant to
An advantage of speed go for computers is Moore's Law: as processors improve,
computers do more work in a given time. No such law applies to human brains. It
is reasonable to expect a doubling in computer go performance every eighteen
months or so - perhaps more so with the trend to multicore pr
Not having byo yomi because it's tough to code isn't really a good
argument. If we want (non-computer-go) people to take the results
seriously, the game timing should be the same as what people naturally do.
I personally am hesitant to play games with fixed time limits because I
don't trust mysel
On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 08:02 +0300, Petri Pitkanen wrote:
> CrazyStone made appearance yesterday on KGS making rather impressive
> record. I think it rank peaked at 1d and ended at 2k. It was playing
> at speed limits of 10 minutes absolute, which seems hard for most
> humans.
> Also it seemed that
On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 15:25 +0200, Łukasz Lew wrote:
> > * In a real game, the tree (i.e. the uct_t object) is thrown away by
> > each call to genmove. Wouldn't it be better to make this a global,
> and
> > then when a move is chosen just delete the sub-trees for the moves
> that
> > weren't chosen
> >The best source of 9x9 professional games is the Mini-go TV series,
> >which finished a few years back, but should have close to 700 games if
> >you can track down the complete set.
> Where would one begin to track down this show?
http://home.wwgo.jp/minigo/
MINIGO ICHIBAN SHOUBU would be a r
I noticed that GnuGo is alsousing 10 min.time limit. People's complaining about
Crazystone's time can be viewed as the program is getting better.
GnuGo uses 10 min time limit. It's short for serious human games. I think part
of the reason is that computer program didn't play that well before an
In [ext]The Theory & Practice of Go, Korschelt describes an
experimental 21x21 goban that he constructed and turned over to his
Master, Murase Shuho, for testing.
Anyone who wants to try this can play email-style games on
dragongoserver.net -- up to 25X25.
Forrest Curo
_
>The best source of 9x9 professional games is the Mini-go TV series,
>which finished a few years back, but should have close to 700 games if
>you can track down the complete set.
Where would one begin to track down this show?
http://home.wwgo.jp/minigo/
> * In uct_t::do_playout(), when two passes in a row then you break and
> score the game at that point. However I don't see anything to stop the
> two passes happening anywhere in the tree, which would upset accuracy.
They can happen anywhere in the tree, pass is just another move.
I do not see w
On 4/11/07, Darren Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Lucasz,
Hi,
I spent some time studying your libego code today. It was educational
(I'd thought you were getting the speed by using assembler in key
functions, so I was surprised and pleased it is all pure C++).
I'm happy I refrained for
On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 23:15 -0700, terry mcintyre wrote:
> Humans don't have much experience with 9x9 go. In such tight confines,
> there is a premium for precise reading; there is little margin for
> error. It is much harder to escape, and harder to trade territory for
> influence. There is also,
From: Darren Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>The best source of 9x9 professional games is the Mini-go TV series,
>which finished a few years back, but should have close to 700 games if
>you can track down the complete set.
Where would one begin to track down this show?
>There is even a book publish
On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 22:24 -0700, David Fotland wrote:
> > I cannot believe 9x9 is harder than 19x19 and
> > I don't care how strong the player is who says that - I don't
> > believe it.
> >
> > - Don
>
> I don't believe it either :) Sorry for the misunderstanding. I was making
> a statement
On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 23:02 -0600, Arend Bayer wrote:
>
> I agree with all David Fotland has been saying. I think every strong
> go player would agree.
I also agree, now that I know he wasn't claiming 9x9 was more
profound.
- Don
> In fact, I think I am stronger than most European 4ds at 9x9
>> No, humans are much weaker on 9x9 than on 19x19.
> With all due respect, that's absurd. If that were true, then all
> we would have to do is move to smaller boards if 19x19 were not
> challenging enough.
You've almost gotten it right. In fact, 9x9 go is used to teach people
the rules of the
High d players( > = 5d) play 1 5 games sometimes on internet. But not for
serious games. I think 10 8 (5 8 at most) is about the fastest a serious 19x19
game can be played comfortably between kyu players. It does not mean the game
will last for a long time. Most lasts about 30 to 40 minutes. The
Quoting Darren Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
9x9 *is* played by professionals, at least in Japan, but naturally with
neither big prize money, nor students wanting to pay to learn it, it is
not played that seriously, and usually with quick time limits.
You can find 9x9 pro games here (but it might
> No one plays 9x9 go. There is no literature on 9x9 theory, and almost no
> examples of professional play.
9x9 *is* played by professionals, at least in Japan, but naturally with
neither big prize money, nor students wanting to pay to learn it, it is
not played that seriously, and usually with
There are multiple possible definitions of what it means for a player
to be the same strength on two different sized boards. It is impossible
to pit a 9x9 player against a 19x19 player. If two people
use different definitions of 'same strength', they are bound to disagree
about which size people
36 matches
Mail list logo
