RE: [computer-go] Go + code + environment

2009-05-25 Thread David Fotland
I use a Gnugo binary for testing the Monte Carlo engine, but I did not use Gnugo for testing any older version of Many Faces. I've never looked at Gnugo's source code. Since I published descriptions of Many Faces' internals before Gnugo was developed, I suspect that some ideas from Many Faces are

Re: [computer-go] Go + code + environment

2009-05-25 Thread Olivier Teytaud
> > > Perhaps I'm mistaken in my reading, but isn't Mogo a clusterized and highly > tuned version of gnugo? Things like that made me want to make this post. As > I find the Go programming community more open to sharing ideas and code than > my chess world counter part. > > Will gladly stand correct

Re: [computer-go] Re:verifiable claims

2009-05-25 Thread Don Dailey
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 12:31 PM, Dave Dyer wrote: > > > > >And somehow I don't ever see comments anywhere suggesting that this could > be a problem. So what I'd like to know is: is this so trivial that no one > ever mentions it, or are the heuristics that programs use to terminate > playouts so

Re: [computer-go] Re: verifiable claims

2009-05-25 Thread Don Dailey
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Stefan Kaitschick < stefan.kaitsch...@hamburg.de> wrote: > Almost any strategy other than playing out all legal moves >> involves a lot of hand waving that is unlikely to be >> accepted as a proof. There are just too many cases where >> a pitch inside a captured

[computer-go] Re:verifiable claims

2009-05-25 Thread Dave Dyer
> >And somehow I don't ever see comments anywhere suggesting that this could be a >problem. So what I'd like to know is: is this so trivial that no one ever >mentions it, or are the heuristics that programs use to terminate playouts so >obscure that they are too embarrasing to mention? Comple

[computer-go] Re:verifiable claims

2009-05-25 Thread Dave Dyer
> >And somehow I don't ever see comments anywhere suggesting that this could be a >problem. So what I'd like to know is: is this so trivial that no one ever >mentions it, or are the heuristics that programs use to terminate playouts so >obscure that they are too embarrasing to mention? Comple

Re: [computer-go] Re: verifiable claims

2009-05-25 Thread Michael Williams
Generally, the playout stops when there are no more "valid" moves remaining. Where "valid" means not playing inside 1-point eye. You can also terminate a playout if one player is winning by a large margin (known as the mercy rule). And you must set a max playout length because some games will g

Re: [computer-go] Re: verifiable claims

2009-05-25 Thread Stefan Kaitschick
Almost any strategy other than playing out all legal moves involves a lot of hand waving that is unlikely to be accepted as a proof. There are just too many cases where a pitch inside a captured space has global effects. Completely solving small goboards seems like a strange quest to me. Certai

Re: [computer-go] Time weighting in opening

2009-05-25 Thread Don Dailey
2009/5/25 Andrés Domínguez > 2009/5/24 Don Dailey : > > > > To be honest, I don't like the Bronstein clock. > > I disagree. I think Bronstein is the best time control > system. Players have fixed time per move, plus a > pool time that can be used at the moves you want. Bronstein is illogical be

Re: [computer-go] Time weighting in opening

2009-05-25 Thread Andrés Domínguez
2009/5/24 Don Dailey : > > To be honest, I don't like the Bronstein clock. I disagree. I think Bronstein is the best time control system. Players have fixed time per move, plus a pool time that can be used at the moves you want. > I believe the most logical time control for games in general is wh