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

On Mon, 2009-05-25 at 11:19 -0700, David Fotland wrote: > I asked about looking at Gnugo source back in 2001, but the answer I > got from Richard Stallman convinced me it would not be a good idea. > Please could you elaborate David? Is the GPL infectious through looking at source code? _

Re: [computer-go] Life and Death

I think that the original description of the position should have said 'killable' rather than 'dead', and that David missed the fact that it is White to move. At 08:06 27/03/2008, Hideki wrote: David Fotland: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >I just looked at this position and it looks like a win for black

Re: [computer-go] New scalability study progress report

This is very cool. As of 261 games played, I find it very difficult to guess whether the mogo curve is beginning to dramatically flatten, or will continue to rise steeply. I have a few questions. I can't see the cross table, I guess you haven't put it up yet? How do you decide the pairings? I

Re: [computer-go] Tesuji

Being a strong player has many obvious advantages, which other people have listed. My concern is that as I get more proficient at a skill like go, the more basic aspects of that skill move from my conscious mind to a more instinctive level, and I forget the reasons for them. In some ways the idea

Re: [computer-go] U. of Alberta bots vs. the Poker pros

At 12:42 28/07/2007, you wrote: At 02:58 28/07/2007, Arend wrote: On 7/26/07, chrilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: This is a remarkable result. I think poker is more difficult than Go and of course chess. I am as surprised by this statement as everyone else. Of cour

[computer-go] OT U. of Alberta bots vs. the Poker pros

At 18:20 26/07/2007, Jeff Nowakowski wrote: On Thu, 2007-07-26 at 18:14 +0200, chrilly wrote: > Chess/Go... can be played in an autistic way. There is no need for an > opponent model. Ah, an opponent model. Where's the poision? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093779/quotes#qt0250635 Too much r

Re: [computer-go] U. of Alberta bots vs. the Poker pros

At 02:58 28/07/2007, Arend wrote: On 7/26/07, chrilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: This is a remarkable result. I think poker is more difficult than Go and of course chess. I am as surprised by this statement as everyone else. Of course you have to develop some mixe

[computer-go] Draughts / Checkers solved

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6907018.stm ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

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

Yes. This number is strongly dependent on strength and board size I think. Very roughly speaking, you can argue as follows 1) in a 9x9 game, the weaker player has only 1/4 as many moves in which to throw away the handicap advantage (compared to 19x19). 2) weak players lose so many points compar

Re: [computer-go] creating a "random" position

At 21:54 08/07/2007, you wrote: I don't have such algorithm, you can count legal positions like: http://www.lysator.liu.se/~gunnar/legal.pike.txt Modifying it could provide some way select random position atleast for small boards. Ported that for java but not studied much of it yet, intres

Re: [computer-go] creating a "random" position

Start with an empty board and do a large number (eg 1, depending on how accurate you need the uniformity) of 'operations' on it, where an operation is the following: 1) choose an intersection at random 2) toss a fair coin 3) change the occupation of the intersection according to the following

Re: [computer-go] Re: 9x9 games wanted

It might be worth asking the administrators of some go servers if they would be prepared to give you copies of some games. At 17:09 06/07/2007, you wrote: I will play with Suzie at the forthcoming European Go championship in Villach/Austria some 9x9 demonstration matches against everybody who

[computer-go] article in the Times

It isn't a very good article in my opinion, but for what it's worth. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/ben_macintyre/article2002699.ece ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listin

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

This is very impressive. To be fair though, they were 0.5 komi games with mogobot taking black. At 21:26 15/06/2007, you wrote: 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

RE: [computer-go] Sylvain's results

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

Re: [computer-go] The dominance of search (Suzie v. GnuGo)

decade or so as well. Or maybe Chrilly will make a monster go machine even before that. Could somebody comment please on the likely usefulness of massively parallel machines to UCT-like algorithms. Thanks again. Tom. At 21:12 10/04/2007, you wrote: Hello, 2007/4/6, Tom Cooper <<mailto:[EM

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

Perhaps it would be possible to infer how the lines would look as perfect play was approached from what the curves looked like for a smaller board size. At 13:06 09/04/2007, Don wrote: On Mon, 2007-04-09 at 05:30 -0400, Weston Markham wrote: > On 4/8/07, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >

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

The discussion here http://senseis.xmp.net/?EloRating suggests that the difference between beginners and top players in go is about 3000 ELO on a 19x19 board. This difference is very dependent on the board size. I can think of a naive argument that this difference should scale linearly with t

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

Thanks dons for producing these fascinating results. I hope that when you have finished the study, you will show us not just this graph, but also the game results (number of wins) that it is derived from. At 02:05 08/04/2007, you wrote: A few weeks ago I announced that I was doing a long term

Re: [computer-go] The dominance of search (Suzie v. GnuGo)

My guess is that the complexity of achieving a fixed standard of play (eg 1 dan) using a global alpha-beta or MC search is an exponential function of the board size. For this guess, I exclude algorithms that have a tactical or local component. If this guess is correct then, even if Moore's la

Re: [computer-go] computer go documentation issues

I agree. The feel of sensei's and wikipedia are completely different. Most of the content on sensei's is too informal for wikipedia, and I think it would get deleted if it was put there, despite this content being very worthwhile. On the other hand, wikipedia is the ideal place for a short autho

Re: [computer-go] Useless moves in the endgame

At 16:20 09/01/2007, you wrote: i'd like to follow this up by saying that i'm interested to see if anyone has compared winning percentage in the following two situations: i) maximize probability of win ii) maximize probability of win until p_win > 1-eps, then maximize total score among all

Re: [computer-go] Re: Interesting problem

At 23:17 03/01/2007, Don wrote: David, I thought of another way to put it which I think, in a way, defines the difference in the rule-sets. You are playing a game, and you think the opponent group is dead. But you are not 100 percent sure. What do you do? Chinese puts the emphasis on the ac

Re: [computer-go] Strongest 9x9 programm?

Very stupid question: Were to I get a fool-proof description how to join the tournament? You know I am from the generation, were one travelled to tournament, shake hand with the programmer of the opponent, entered the moves by hand These internet tournaments are also a cultural shock. C

Re: [computer-go] When is Pass the best move?

Cool idea Dons! I think taking away the ordinary ko rule in this way would have too strong a distorting effect on the game. The player who was behind could win all ko fights, and eventually there would be a ko fight that neither could afford to lose. Too many games would be drawn. It would end

Re: [computer-go] When is Pass the best move?

At 01:54 23/10/2006, you wrote: There was a posting on this list with an example of a (contrived?) situation where sacrificing a pass-alive group is appropriate, in order to win a ko that is more valuable. Is even #1 "100% admissible"? Weston I must have missed this, and find it surprisin

Re: [computer-go] positional repetition.

Under Japanese rules, triple ko is treated as a 'no result'. This isn't a draw, but it is something like one. Also, triple ko isn't the only type of long-cycle, but I guess it is the most common (any other candidates?) Japanese rules don't have superko at all as far as I know. At 13:55 22/10/2