Re: [computer-go] Rank on servers at 9x9

Le 12/02/2010 à 08:43, Darren Cook a écrit : > > Do any of the strongest MCTS programs have a rank at 9x9 on any major > server? I found the "fuego9" account on KGS but it appears to be > unranked and only playing free games (*). The "ManyFaces" account > appears to play only 19x19. > > I know th

Re: Réf. : Re: [computer-go] Dynamic Komi's basics

Le 11/02/2010 à 16:27, Le Hir Matthieu a écrit : > In other words, pachi's dynamic komi should be twice as high as it is ? > Currently, on first move - at 9 handi - pachi has an advantage of about 66 > points thanks to his komi. It should be about 130? How would that affect his > play ? More second

Re: [computer-go] Dynamic Komi's basics

Hi Le 11/02/2010 à 10:32, Le Hir Matthieu a écrit : > Hi, > > > From what I think I understood, dynamic komi is supposed to try to keep the > game more even. The dynamic komi is a bias in the evaluation in order to "inform" the bot that the game is balanced, and prevent it beeing "blinded" by

Re: [computer-go] Re: Open source real time Go server

Le 18/01/2010 à 18:37, terry mcintyre a écrit : > My pet peeve is the KGS "score estimator", which is often wildly wrong. The best thing to do would be to remove the score estimator which prevent people from thinking. I bet there would be much less stupid chat during games whithout it :) Alain.

Re: [computer-go] Pachi/fuego GnuGo hybrid

Le 18/01/2010 à 10:54, Petr Baudis a écrit : > it would be great to share other information like L&D > and semeai critical moves; perhaps GNUGo even provides interface to get > these as well. yes, via gtp you can easyly see in gogui :-), and maybe more with gnugo tool (regress.pike ?) Alain __

Re: [computer-go] (no subject) wish hahn

Le 04/01/2010 à 18:09, Petr Baudis a écrit : > I don't think Hahn tournament would be that interesting, As a physicist i like to experiment first, and think later, to understand what happened, which obviously was not foreseen ;-) I believe it will reveal some hidden aspect of the stronger engines,

Re: [computer-go] (no subject)

Le 04/01/2010 à 14:19, Nick Wedd a écrit : > I have discussed these extra events in the past, and received feedback > here; which, unfortunately, I have forgotten. So please, anyone who is > interested, make your suggestions now. As a spectator i would like an Hanh tournament on 19x19, not t

Re: [computer-go] Fuego parameter question

Le 06/12/2009 à 01:05, Darren Cook a écrit : > You also need to set max_nodes quite high or Fuego will keep stopping to > clear out its tree. I'm setting it to max_games*50, so for 8000: > uct_param_search max_nodes 40 > > According to my notes fuego uses 75M + (65M per million max_nodes). S

Re: [computer-go] Re: Hahn system tournament and MC bots

Le 26/11/2009 à 10:08, Vlad Dumitrescu a écrit : > > On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 00:43, Darren Cook wrote: > > When I read this it reminded me of experiments I tried before to pass > > more than one piece of information up from the leaf nodes of a (min-max) > > tree. E.g. a territory estimate and an

Re: [computer-go] Re: Hahn system tournament and MC bots

Le 25/11/2009 à 15:11, Vlad Dumitrescu a écrit : > What I am considering is a way to analyze a list of moves, each having > in turn a value that is a list of expected outcomes and their > respective estimated probabilities, and to sort the moves by the > expected outcome in the context of a given r

Re: [computer-go] Re: Hahn system tournament and MC bots

Le 25/11/2009 à 12:39, Vlad Dumitrescu a écrit : > > On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 12:04, Nick Wedd wrote: > > A program to play Hahn Go has no > > reason to calculate probabilities, it should just make the biggest move it > > can. > > Ah, okay, now I understand your point of view. Thanks for explaini

Re: [computer-go] Re: Hahn system tournament and MC bots. and KGS tournament ?

Le 24/11/2009 à 00:24, dhillism...@netscape.net a écrit : > > For my fast/dumb neural net engine, Antbot9x9, I coevolved the weights using > a similar tournament system. Each individual played a number of games against > all the others, round robin, and the score was the sum of points for all of

Re: [computer-go] Hahn system tournament and MC bots

Le 23/11/2009 à 15:04, Don Dailey a écrit : > On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 1:58 AM, Robert Jasiek wrote: > > > Don Dailey wrote: > > > this simplification of the rules > > > > Simplification? It does not even simplify strategy. > > > > I am asserting that a properly modified bot is going to better at

[computer-go] Hahn system tournament and MC bots

A Go tounrmaent with Hahn system has been retransmeted on kgs/eurogo TV With these rules, the actual count makes a difference (as opposed to just win/lose) Winning by >40.5gets 100 points ...... Losing by >40.5gets 0 point

Re: [computer-go] Rated bots on KGS

Le 19/11/2009 à 13:10, Mark Boon a écrit : > > On Nov 19, 2009, at 1:24 AM, Nick Wedd wrote: > > > So a bot which appears on KGS, gets rated as 25k, plays hundreds of > > games, and then improves to 15k, is going to do a lot of damage to > > the rating system. > > What happens when all those

Re: [computer-go] Elo move prediction

Le 19/11/2009 à 09:35, Seth Pellegrino a écrit : > > Hello all, > > I'm working on an implementation of Rémi Coulom's Elo-based move > prediction algorithm[1], and I seem to be running into efficiency > issues. Very simple question to start: What is the programmation language ? Do you use 1d rep

Re: [computer-go] Re: Joseki Book

Le 10/11/2009 à 15:56, Stefan Kaitschick a écrit : > > Ofcourse I can't say what a "correct" opening is. > What I can say though, is that if bots are onto something with their strange > openings, at this point it's by accident. It is not by accident, it is consistent with what the bot can read. >

Re: [computer-go] Joseki Book

Le 09/11/2009 à 08:04, Jessica Mullins a écrit : > > Hi, > > I am wondering what is the best way to build a Joseki Book? I am a student at > Lewis & Clark College and am working with Professor Peter Drake to build a > Joseki Book for the program Orego. > > Right now I am extracting moves from pr

Re: [computer-go] Re: Mirror Go against Zen

Le 23/07/2009 à 09:21, Ingo Althöfer a écrit : .../... > > Therefore I really like the test series by Yamato (with 30 out of > 100 wins for Zen against mirror strategy) > > > Can we assume that both programs are approximately equal or is MFGO > > clearly stronger (or visa versa?) > > In "normal"

Re: [computer-go] Re: Mirror Go against Zen

Le 20/07/2009 à 16:01, Don Dailey a écrit : > Ok, so I am right about this, you take advantage of the asymmetry of > captures. > > But go programs do not KNOW they are playing mirror go GNU Go knows if the game is mirror-go or not, and "decide" to break it when a sufficent number of moves is reac

Re: [computer-go] Re: Mirror Go against Zen

Le 20/07/2009 à 15:34, Don Dailey a écrit : > Again, I don't understand go so well, but how do you win against mirror > go? > > It seems you must either take advantage somehow of the non-symmetry of the > center point OR take advantage of the fact that a capture could break the > symmetry. Is th

Re: [computer-go] Slightly OT: Sound in CGoban

Le 16/07/2009 à 22:28, Peter Drake a écrit : > I've recently been getting an odd distorted buzzing with every sound > played by CGoban3, the KGS client. This doesn't happen with other > applications, so I don't think it's a hardware or driver problem. > > Has anyone else encountered this? > >

Re: [computer-go] Fast ways to evaluate program strength.

Le 08/04/2009 à 07:28, Petri Pitkanen a écrit : > > This is nice idea and this is to a degree what GnuGo regression test > does. afaik, gnugo testsuite (based on a previous one) is not totally suitable for MC programs, as some position are dead lost / clear win but shows gg misbehavior. Some

Re: [computer-go] Black/White winning rates with random playout?

Le jeudi 8 janvier 2009, Nuno Milheiro a écrit : > It seems normal to me, Blac is only one play ahead, which value is several > points (probably 7,5 hence the komi value) given intelligent play, given > random play the value of one more move may be only one point. > > You should try with more komi

Re: [computer-go] komi for 13x13 and 19x19

Le samedi 2 août 2008, Christoph Birk a écrit : > > On Aug 2, 2008, at 10:34 AM, Don Dailey wrote: > > Does it make sense to use a komi of 7.5 for 13x13 and 19x19 under CGOS > > rules? > > I don't know about 13x13, but for 19x19 you should use 6.5. > Is'nt the komi 6.5 with japanese rules => 7.

Re: [computer-go] off topic: Tobacco

Le mardi 8 avril 2008, Dave Dyer a écrit : > > > > >By the way, has anyone seen the Philip Morris commercials? > > I believe they were forced into this as part of the extortion > by the state attorneys general. It's Penance for illegally > targeting young non-smokers with Joe Camel, and prom

Re: [computer-go] Hybrid theory

Le vendredi 1 février 2008, David Doshay a écrit : > This is the direction in which we are moving with SlugGo. We also > expect it to be difficult to integrate different approaches, but this > has always been our research direction: when there are multiple > codes which will each give an evaluation

Re: [computer-go] Re: komi argument = silly

Le vendredi 7 mars 2008, Petr Baudis a écrit : > This has nothing to do with black/white distinction. The idea is to > dynamically adjust the komi to make UCT to aim at higher and potentially > less sure win or lower and potentially more sure loss. Of course, > depending on whether it takes black o

[computer-go] GNU Go is not public domain

Hi On http://cgos.boardspace.net/study/13/index.html we read : > a reference point, a popular program in the public domain called "Gnugo" It is open source and libre program GPL, but not public domain. Alain ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@co

Re: [computer-go] 13x13 study. Time and memory

Le vendredi 22 février 2008, Sylvain Gelly a écrit : > 2008/2/22, Alain Baeckeroot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Le jeudi 21 février 2008, Don Dailey a écrit : > > > If you look at the table you will notice that going from level 4 to > > > level 11 (which is 7 doubl

Re: [computer-go] 13x13 study. Time and memory

Le jeudi 21 février 2008, Don Dailey a écrit : > If you look at the table you will notice that going from level 4 to > level 11 (which is 7 doublings and should take 128X longer) only takes > 59.43 X longer. > So if we plot 9X9 rank vs time, maybe we have a straight line :) ELO vs size of the t

Re: [computer-go] 13x13 study.

Le jeudi 21 février 2008, Don Dailey a écrit : > The study is running very well. We have 32 computers being used so > far, some participants are providing 2 (or even more) computers. > > It would be great to get even more as we get into higher levels, as it > will take a LOT of power to get

Re: [computer-go] Re: computer-go Digest, Vol 43, Issue 8

Le lundi 18 février 2008, Michael Williams a écrit : > But as was pointed out before, these high levels of MoGo are probably still > not pro level, right? > On 9x9 Big_slow_Mogo is near pro level, maybe more. 6 monthes ago or so it was able to regurlarly beat pro without komi on 9x9. Alain ___

Re: [computer-go] gpugo. optimisation

Le mercredi 13 février 2008, Florian Erhardt a écrit : > If anyone knows where I could get SIMPLE docs explaining optimizations > for vector cpus, that would be great. Some basic advices and links. Read Linux Coding Style, especially section concerning indentation and functions. Draw the flow ch

Re: [computer-go] Re: komi

Le mardi 12 février 2008, David Schneider-Joseph a écrit : > On Feb 11, 2008, at 8:42 PM, Don Dailey wrote: > > > David Schneider-Joseph wrote: > By definition, > komi is proportional to the value of moving first. Likewise, by > definition, your skill is the amount of value you get out of a m

Re: [computer-go] Re: Fw: big_Mogo_19

Le vendredi 8 février 2008, terry mcintyre a écrit : > Probably true, but I am already running into RAM > limits with big_Mogo18 - had to halve the number of > instances of the autotest program, and am installing > RAM in the next few days to alleviate this problem. > There is also the time-per-gam

Re: [computer-go] Transformation between KGS ratings and Elo

Le samedi 2 février 2008, Christoph Birk a écrit : > On Sat, 2 Feb 2008, Alain Baeckeroot wrote: > > 1800 is gnugo, so this puts top programs near 1k (2d for extreme > > mogo_18) this seems reasonable to me. > > Are you confusing 19x19 and 9x9? > The ELO/KGS table is

Re: [computer-go] Hybrid theory

Le samedi 2 février 2008, terry mcintyre a écrit : > > Apologies for not quoting Don Dailey's text on Borda voting -- > yahoo is doing something truly awful with quoted text, for some reason. > It also break mail-thread, putting your post in uncorelated thread. Maybe switch to another mail ? ;-

Re: [computer-go] scalability study

Le vendredi 1 février 2008, terry mcintyre a écrit : > Regarding the scalability study, ... > I'm very curious about that flat spot for > Mogo-16, 17, and 18. ( http://cgos.boardspace.net/study/index.html ) > I think its just lack of data Mogo_16 = 2958+47 / -45 Mo

Re: [computer-go] Transformation between KGS ratings and Elo

Le vendredi 1 février 2008, Andy a écrit : > See below I created a table that shows the transformation from KGS ratings > to the Elo that CGOS uses. I set 6k=1800 because I believe that is what GNU > 3.7.10 is under both systems. Does anyone have more data points for bots > that play on both syst

Re: [computer-go] Hybrid theory

Le vendredi 1 février 2008, David Doshay a écrit : > This is the direction in which we are moving with SlugGo. We also > expect it to be difficult to integrate different approaches, but this > has always been our research direction: when there are multiple > codes which will each give an evaluation

Re: [computer-go] 19x19 Study. Nakade is difficult

Le mercredi 30 janvier 2008, Don Dailey a écrit : > I must not understand the problem. My program has no trouble with > nakade unless you are talking about some special case position.My > program immediately places the stone on the magic square to protect it's > 2 eyes.I can't believe m

Re: [computer-go] 19x19 Study - prior in bayeselo, and KGS study

Le mercredi 30 janvier 2008, Michael Williams a écrit : > I don't feel like searching for it right now, but not too long ago someone > posted a link to a chart that gave the winrates and equivalent rankings for > different > rating systems. > > Wikipedia have a nice graph to compare all rating

Re: [computer-go] 19x19 Study - prior in bayeselo, and KGS study

Le mercredi 30 janvier 2008, David Fotland a écrit : > 3 kyu at this level is a lot for a person. I've know club players who never > got better than 9k, and people who study and play may still take a year or > more to make this much improvement. > > Many club players stall somewhere between 7k an

[computer-go] out of topic: Bobby Fisher

Hello http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/18/fischer_dead/ Alain. ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

Re: [computer-go] Re: Scalbility study: low end

Le jeudi 24 janvier 2008, Don Dailey a écrit : > Hi Hideki, > > No need to stop any of the weaker games since 99% of the compute time is > consumed by the strongest half. > > Also, only the new mogo's will be scheduled to play until they catch up > - however their opponent will almost always be

Re: [computer-go] Is MC-UCT really scalable ... is a troll

Le mercredi 23 janvier 2008, ivan dubois a écrit : > Hi Alain, > Sorry for being so insistant : You should browse the archive of the list, nearly the same discussion about infinite and scalability happenned in 2007. > > >No i just said that, unless i really understood nothing, i read here from

Re: [computer-go] Is MC-UCT really scalable ... is a troll

Le mardi 22 janvier 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : > >Infinite scalability is a theoricaly proved property, so please > >don't feed the troll :-) > > Are you saying that the scalability is linear between number of playouts and > ranking? > No i just said that, unless i really understood nothi

Re: [computer-go] orego license?

Le mardi 22 janvier 2008, Peter Drake a écrit : > The license for Orego is GPL: basically, you can do whatever you want > with it, but don't sell it, claim our stuff is your invention, or try > to prevent anyone else from using it. You can sell GPL, but you can't prevent the owner to redristrib

Re: [computer-go] Is MC-UCT really scalable against humans?

Le mardi 22 janvier 2008, Mark Boon a écrit : > > On 22-jan-08, at 11:33, Magnus Persson wrote: > > > So feel free to argue that 19x19 has properties that are unique, > > but in doing so please *specify* exactly what this means and why a > > computer program has to deal with it to play really

Re: [computer-go] Is MC-UCT really scalable ... is a troll

Le mardi 22 janvier 2008, David Fotland a écrit : > > The UCT-MC programs do particularly well against traditional programs > because they expose the brittleness inherent in the pattern databases they > use. Strong humans are not so easily beaten by playing unconventional and > somewhat inferior

Re: [computer-go] New scalability study : show uncertainty ?

Le mardi 22 janvier 2008, Michael Williams a écrit : > > ... perhaps only uniformly random playouts > > will scale to perfection. > > The reason that MC/UCT scales to perfection is because of the UCT part, > not the MC (playout) part. People seems to forget this a lot. > I agree on this _only_

Re: [computer-go] 19x19 cgos ranking page

Le mardi 22 janvier 2008, Olivier Teytaud a écrit : > > >Have you selected the room with bot's name as a member? > > > > > > > Yes. Seemingly only public rooms are possible for bots. > I'm interested in if someone has a solution for private rooms. > I know that Aloril is running one mogobot clo

Re: [computer-go] Is MC-UCT really scalable against humans?

Le mardi 22 janvier 2008, Petri Pitkanen a écrit : > 2008/1/22, Eric Boesch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > On Jan 22, 2008 1:43 AM, Petri Pitkanen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Even top MC programs fail to see that a group with 3 liberties with > > > no eyes is dead. > > > > A 3-liberty group with no

Re: [computer-go] KGS private room

Le lundi 21 janvier 2008, Olivier Teytaud a écrit : > I am trying to connect a bot to a KGS private room. > > If we set "computer-go" as the room, the bot comes and plays against > its opponents. > > But if we set the name of the room, the bot comes and can be seen in the > room, but does not pla

Re: [computer-go] New scalability study : show uncertainty ?

Le samedi 19 janvier 2008, Don Dailey a écrit : > The new scalability study is in progress. It will be very slow going, > only a few games a day can be played but we are trying to get more > computers utilized. > > I will update the data a few times a day for all to see. This includes > a cro

Re: [computer-go] Anchor player

Le jeudi 17 janvier 2008, Don Dailey a écrit : > Perfect! I will adjust the level so that it plays as strong as > possible on CGOS without taking a risk of getting into time trouble on > modest hardware. Then I can make Mogo the anchor player. > Even if i love Mogo, and i am very impresse

Re: [computer-go] Sylvain Gelly thesis in english

Le dimanche 13 janvier 2008, terry mcintyre a écrit : > From: Rémi Coulom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >Sylvain Gelly wrote: > > >> Yes I did! :).It is not on my website, but will (soon?). > >> However, you should not be so eager to read it :) > > >> Cheers, > >> Sylvain > > >Google finds it: > >

Re: [computer-go] handicap for mogo against pro ?

Le samedi 12 janvier 2008, Olivier Teytaud a écrit : > [game against MoGo and a professional player] > > >> It will be the MPI version of mogo, and in various board-sizes. > > > >What handicap, if any? > > I don't know yet. There is lot of room to show improvements. JL Gaily reports games with m

Re: [computer-go] To French speakers: computer Go on the French Radio

Le jeudi 10 janvier 2008, Olivier Teytaud a écrit : > > They announce that a match will be organized between MoGo and a > > professional > > player in March, during the Paris Go Tournament. > > It will be the > MPI version of mogo, and > in various board-sizes. > What will be the hardware for M

Re: [computer-go] How to get more participation in 19x19 CGOS?

Le mardi 8 janvier 2008, Don Dailey a écrit : ... > On 19x19 it might be 30 minutes per side like we have now, with 5 > minute games for the fast time control.We would probably have to > work it out so that program like gnugo would be able to handle the fast > time control at their standard se

Re: [computer-go] Difficult and strong move

Le mardi 8 janvier 2008, terry mcintyre a écrit : > - Original Message > From: Stuart A. Yeates <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >I recommend "Mathematical Go: Chilling Gets the Last Point" by Elwyn > >Berlekamp and David Wolfe. The book contains a number of such > >positions, as well as an appro

Re: [computer-go] Re: language efficiency

Le mardi 18 décembre 2007, Harald Korneliussen a écrit : > Some thinking out loud here on the topic of languages and efficiency: > > I'd like to know how well MoGo would have played if you let it think > for a week for every move. Only it seems to me that is not possible, > because I don't think M

Re: [computer-go] Microsoft Research Lectures: Akihiro Kishimoto

Le mercredi 12 décembre 2007, Harri Salakoski a écrit : > Such comment just take my word back little it is maybe awesome but I can't > say is it or not, as have still bugs left. > > E E E > E E E > BEE > WWWEBEE > E E EWBEE > E E WEBEE > ABCDEFG > For example current version(not releas

Re: [computer-go] Where and How to Test the Strong Programs?

Le mercredi 12 décembre 2007, Ben Lambrechts a écrit : > > > How do AGA ratings compare to KGS? > Sensei's Library is your friend ;o) > http://senseis.xmp.net/?RankWorldwideComparison > I believe this page has not been updated since last year change on kgs ranking scale. Kgs have the big advant

Re: [computer-go] Gnugo rank on 9x9 on kgs

Le jeudi 6 décembre 2007, Don Dailey a écrit : > > Lavergne Thomas wrote: > > If some bot can be setup to play on kgs for enough time to get a solid > > rank and then put on cgos to get an elo rating with the same > > configuration we could find a formula to convert elo to kgs ranks. > > For sure,

Re: [computer-go] Elo and handicap matching

Le mardi 4 décembre 2007, Christoph Birk a écrit : > On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Alain Baeckeroot wrote: > >> For 9x9 ELO works better. For 19x19 it's less clear cut.The > >> handicap system appears to be a good system at 19x19 and has the very > >> nice m

Re: [computer-go] Elo and handicap matching

handicaps/ with and "interesting observation" in the end. Alain. > > However, this data should still be quite useful. > > - Don > > > Alain Baeckeroot wrote: > > Le mardi 4 décembre 2007, Don Dailey a écrit : > > > > > >> For 9x9 ELO works b

Re: [computer-go] Elo and handicap matching

Le mardi 4 décembre 2007, Don Dailey a écrit : > > > For 9x9 ELO works better. For 19x19 it's less clear cut.The > handicap system appears to be a good system at 19x19 and has the very > nice merit of allowing grossly mismatched players to compete. I > think the two systems can be ma

Re: [computer-go] KGS connection

Le dimanche 11 novembre 2007, Stuart A. Yeates a écrit : > On 10/11/2007, Nick Wedd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > > Chris Fant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes > > >> A beginner could easily run gnugo for a day or two, get a 7k rank for > > >> the > > >> gnugo account

Re: [computer-go] Gnugo development and MC

Le lundi 5 novembre 2007, Don Dailey a écrit : > I noticed there are various Gnugo with Monte Carlo enhancements. Will > any of these be integrated into the the Gnugo releases? It seems like a > logical move. As far as i know MonteGNU is more or less: http://trac.gnugo.org/gnugo/ticket/150 and c

Re: [computer-go] Handicap vs Elo

Le lundi 29 octobre 2007, Don Dailey a écrit : > I don't see Mogo on the server?Where is Mogo? > > However CrazyStone is there to represent the Monte Carlo programs and > seems to be doing a very good job indeed! > > CS-8-26-2CPU is > doi

Re: [computer-go] Where is Mogo?

Le lundi 29 octobre 2007, Don Dailey a écrit : > I don't see Mogo on the server?Where is Mogo? > > However CrazyStone is there to represent the Monte Carlo programs and > seems to be doing a very good job indeed! > > CS-8-26-2CPU is > doi

Re: [computer-go] Opening game strategies

Le lundi 15 octobre 2007 20:53, Erik S. Steinmetz a écrit : > Greetings all, > > I have been looking through the literature (many thanks to Markus's > wonderful online bibliography) on existing strategies in the opening > game, and have not found too many articles on the specifics outside >

Re: [computer-go] best approach forward

Le jeudi 11 octobre 2007 21:15, Don Dailey a écrit : > I appreciate the vote of confidence, but my point is that if you want > some kind of "certified" rating CGOS is not a good choice. You can run > anything on CGOS and claim anything. You could even substitute a > strong human player, if you

Re: [computer-go] best approach forward

Le jeudi 11 octobre 2007 22:31, Christoph Birk a écrit : > On Thu, 11 Oct 2007, Don Dailey wrote: > > But we had a 19x19 server and it WAS NOT interesting. Nobody seemed > > willing to play on it. > > Maybe that has changed now. > It was not interesting because there was only one competitive > pr

Re: [computer-go] Re: Former ... inhuman MC/UCT style

Le vendredi 12 octobre 2007 06:10, Dave Dyer a écrit : > > Considering how monte carlo actually works, I think it's plausible > to argue that it works best where the distance to endgame is small. > And for a player against Mogo this is very un-human feature on 19x19. - Fuseki is done agaisnt a 1

Re: [computer-go] IEEE Spectrum article by Deep Blue creator

Le mardi 2 octobre 2007 16:46, Ian Osgood a écrit : > Greetings, > > I noticed that the following link was recently added to the Computer > Go Wikipedia article. > > http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/oct07/5552 Cracking Go, by Feng-hsiung > Hsu, IEEE Spectrum magazine, October 2007. > > He claims it sho

Re: [computer-go] problems w/ 19x19 cgos server

Le vendredi 21 septembre 2007 21:35, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : > If the 19x19 CGOS is going to be retired due to lack of interest, > I wonder if there would be interest in trying out an ultra-blitz > version for a while: games as fast as the com. links would permit.? > (Game storage would be an

Re: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo

On Monday 10 September 2007 10:37:17 Sylvain Gelly wrote: > > Is there a option like gnugo's "--capture-all-dead"? > > In my test(./mogo --9 --time 1), seems mogo passed when not capture > > alldead stones. > > As this release is mainly for humans to play, it is set to play > against humans, so

Re: [computer-go] SGF parsing

Le lundi 9 juillet 2007 18:46, Joshua Shriver a écrit : > Ok found some KGS games, and they make a lot more sense. With the > specification I can see what all of the OT, AP, TM, FF, etc commads > are. However I don't understand the way it sets the location, so far > nothing I've seen describes it.

Re: [computer-go] 9x9 games wanted and the next big challenge

Le dimanche 8 juillet 2007 11:51, chrilly a écrit : > If it would be really a big challenge, there would be some money. There was a computer challenge with 1 million dollar prize during many years, for a program abble to beat one professional choosen by the sponsor. I don't know if it is still vali

[computer-go] mogobot against 5 dan pro on kgs

Hi everybody Guojuan (5p) has played some games agaisnt mogobot on kgs. Worth to look at, and mogobot 3.0 won some on 9x9 Congrats to mogobot team, and thanks to Guo Juan for the games :) Alain ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.or

Re: [computer-go] Re: 9x9 vs 19x19 (was: computer-go Digest)

Le mardi 22 mai 2007 01:52, Dave Dyer a écrit : > > I figured that a credible anchor player for 19x19 might > need a lot of cycles, and need to play a lot of games > at first, so spreading the load would be a good idea. Maybe GNU Go 3.7.10 is _the_ good anchor player for 19x19: - everybody use it

Re: [computer-go] 19x19 Go, scalability with time vs handicap

Le dimanche 22 avril 2007 22:26, Sylvain Gelly a écrit : > Hello Daniel, > > Le dimanche 22 avril 2007 21:26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : > > For human players a difference of 2 kyu means that the winning ratio of the > > stronger player is almost 100%. > > > Is it? Do you have some statistics? If

Re: [computer-go] The physics of Go playing strength.

Le lundi 9 avril 2007 14:06, Don Dailey a écrit : > But the point is that > as long as you can provide time and memory you will get improvement > until perfect play is reached. Is there any proof that heavy player converge toward the same solution as the pure random playout ? With infinite resour

Re: [computer-go] The physics of Go playing strength.

Le dimanche 8 avril 2007 03:05, Don Dailey a écrit : > A few weeks ago I announced that I was doing a long term > scalability study with computer go on 9x9 boards. > > I have constructed a graph of the results so far: > > http://greencheeks.homelinux.org:8015/~drd/public/study.jpg Thanks for th

Re: [computer-go] Re: Big board. Temperature

Le vendredi 2 mars 2007 12:55, Jacques Basaldúa a écrit : > In CGT the temperature is the difference between the value if you play > and the value if you pass. Thanks for your lights :) Ok i better understand my confusion. In Go CGT-temperature applied to yose strongly looks like ordinary points (m

Re: [computer-go] Re: Big board. Temperature

Le jeudi 1 mars 2007 12:36, Nick Wedd a écrit : > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes > >(I propose to ban the term "temperature" from CGT, and replace it by "value", > >unless someone can explain the link with temperature in physics, and shows > >some identical properties ;-) > > This would be confusing.

Re: [computer-go] Re: Big board. Temperature

Le jeudi 1 mars 2007 11:51, Jason House a écrit : > alain Baeckeroot wrote: > > (I propose to ban the term "temperature" from CGT, and replace it by > > "value", > > unless someone can explain the link with temperature in physics, and shows > > som

Re: [computer-go] Re: Big board. Temperature

Physics temperature is a macroscopic description (global) of the underlying (un)-stability, so it comes to mind very quickly :) Unfortunately the term temperature used in Computer Game theory is misleading for physicists. CGT-temperature = value of the best move in go, this has very little relation

Re: [computer-go] Big board, ++physics

Le mercredi 28 février 2007 16:49, Oliver Lewis a écrit : > On 2/23/07, David Doshay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On 22, Feb 2007, at 9:03 PM, alain Baeckeroot wrote: > > > ... I made very slow progress to formalize this ... > > > But the

Re: [computer-go] Big board, ++physics

Le jeudi 22 février 2007 01:16, David Doshay a écrit : > It is pretty clear to me that, if the analogy to MC simulations in > magnets > is of any value, the temperature of the Go game you show is hotter than > optimal. > > If the temperature were at the transition temperature, then each of the >

Re: [computer-go] Big board. Torus ?

Le vendredi 23 février 2007 01:19, Matt Gokey a écrit : > 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 is n

Re: [computer-go] scalability studies with UCT

Le jeudi 22 février 2007 17:00, Don Dailey a écrit : > It appears that at 9x9 Lazarus needs more play-outs to equalize with > gnugo. However, it also appears that at higher levels the superiority > is even greater than in the 7x7 games. This is non-intuitive and > probably not really the case - I

Re: [computer-go] Big board. Torus ?

Le jeudi 22 février 2007 14:11, Matt Gokey a écrit : > The only thing that matters is the graph topology. A corollary is that > on any board that is completely balanced at the beginning with identical > number of neighbors for all nodes, any 1st play is equivalent and > therefore optimal. Yes.

Re: [computer-go] Big board. Torus ?

Le mercredi 21 février 2007 02:10, Antonin Lucas a écrit : > No need for those difficulties, you can play along this board : > > http://www.youdzone.com/go.html I think this is not a torus, even if each vertice has 4 neighbours. I can easily mentally transform this into a cylinder, with an recta

Re: [computer-go] CGOS: Forfeit

Le mardi 20 février 2007 13:10, Heikki Levanto a écrit : > P.S. Was there a good description of what a bot should do to finish a > game earlier - my current ones play to the bitter end, with only 1-point > eyes left. Might as well quit earlier if I can. > Don't play moves which would be self-ata

Re: [computer-go] Monte-Carlo Go simulation

Le jeudi 8 février 2007 22:09, Sylvain Gelly a écrit : > > It seems i was ambiguous: I was speaking of the simulation player too. > > What i meant is a random simulation player is not biased, whereas a "better" > > simulation player is biased by its knowledge, and thus can give wrong > > evaluation

Re: [computer-go] Monte-Carlo Go simulation

Le jeudi 8 février 2007 20:12, Sylvain Gelly a écrit : > > One simple explaination could be that a random player shamelessly tries > > "all" > > moves (very bad ones but also very nice tesuji) whereas the "stronger" > > player > > is restricted by its knowledge and will always miss some kind of m

  1   2   >