It's not real important for this test, but I think I will use
gnugo-3.7.11 as the anchor and set it to 1800.0 ELO - which I think is
fairly close to what it would do on CGOS.
I will use level 10.
- Don
Alain Baeckeroot wrote:
> Le jeudi 17 janvier 2008, Don Dailey a écrit :
>
>> Perfect!
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
>> One question I have - is compensation normally given in the 1 stone
>> case?
>
>I believe, no.
>
>> Also, in the case of NO handicap, what komi is normally
>given in 19x19
>> Chinese? 6.5, 7.5 ???
>
>It's 7.5
As best I understand it, a "one stone" game is actually normal play
without k
2006/12/26, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
There are many other ways to take advantage of your opponent in
chess that I consider sound if applied in a very measured and
careful way. None of them call for making truly unsound moves,
especially when you consider that in a losing position, all mo
But not all of those are final (often dead stones remain on board).
But one eye seki is an answer for me.
Thanks,
Lukasz
On 12/27/06, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I extracted all the games from one month and uniq'd them, it looks
like
all results are possible:
Forfeit B+
Forfeit
I extracted all the games from one month and uniq'd them, it looks
like
all results are possible:
Forfeit B+
Forfeit W+
Illegal B+
Illegal W+
Resign B+
Resign W+
Time B+
Time W+
0.5 B+
0.5 W+
1.5 B+
1.5 W+
2.5 B+
2.5 W+
3.5 B+
3.5 W+
4.5 B+
4.5 W+
5.5 B+
5.5
On 12/27/06, nando <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 12/27/06, Łukasz Lew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
(...)
> Normal seki gives two neutral points, so it doesn't matter.
Two one-eyed groups sharing one dame are another common form
of seki, and these give you the sought one point difference.
-John
On 12/27/06, Łukasz Lew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
(...)
Normal seki gives two neutral points, so it doesn't matter.
I'm walking on increasingly thin ice (for me), but you're right,
"normal" sekis shouldn't change things. Though, there are also beasts
like this one:
http://senseis.xmp.net/?pat
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Dec 27, 2006, at 14:56 , Łukasz Lew wrote:
I believe there is, yes (that's what I was hinting at with "almost").
There must be a seki somewhere on the board though.
Normal seki gives two neutral points, so it doesn't matter.
Doesn't CGOS con
On 12/27/06, nando <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 12/27/06, Łukasz Lew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree :)
> What I wanted to ask is:
> Does there exists two final (no profitable move left) 9x9 board
> positions that their area score differ by one point ?
Ah, sorry :)
I believe there is, yes
On 12/27/06, Łukasz Lew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I agree :)
What I wanted to ask is:
Does there exists two final (no profitable move left) 9x9 board
positions that their area score differ by one point ?
Ah, sorry :)
I believe there is, yes (that's what I was hinting at with "almost").
There
On 12/27/06, nando <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 12/27/06, Łukasz Lew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
(...)
> >
> > It's 7.5
>
> Is there a difference?
> I.e. Have You seen a situation where the result is W+(even number)
> (on Chinese/CGOS rules) ?
In chinese rules (or AGA), there's (almost) no diffe
On 12/27/06, Łukasz Lew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
(...)
>
> It's 7.5
Is there a difference?
I.e. Have You seen a situation where the result is W+(even number)
(on Chinese/CGOS rules) ?
In chinese rules (or AGA), there's (almost) no difference between 5.5
and 6.5 or between 7.5 and 8.5. Curren
On 12/26/06, nando <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 12/26/06, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, that's my plan.I'm going to use fixed handicap and 1 stone
> compensation per handicap stone.
>
> One question I have - is compensation normally given in the 1 stone
> case?
I believe, no.
On 12/26/06, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yes, that's my plan.I'm going to use fixed handicap and 1 stone
compensation per handicap stone.
One question I have - is compensation normally given in the 1 stone
case?
I believe, no.
Also, in the case of NO handicap, what komi is nor
Yes, that's my plan.I'm going to use fixed handicap and 1 stone
compensation per handicap stone.
One question I have - is compensation normally given in the 1 stone
case?
Also, in the case of NO handicap, what komi is normally given in 19x19
Chinese? 6.5, 7.5 ???
- Don
On Tue,
On 12/26/06, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yes, the answer is that there is no gtp command available that defines
whether handicap stones are also compensated or by how much.
Just like there's no GTP command to define the ruleset. This
compensation is 0 in japanese rules, N in chinese
On Tue, 2006-12-26 at 12:56 -0500, House, Jason J. wrote:
>
> >The question that I was asking is how do we inform the computer of the
> >handicap system? Is there a gtp command to inform the program of the
> >type of compensation since there is more than 1 possibility?
>
> There are two handic
>The question that I was asking is how do we inform the computer of the
>handicap system? Is there a gtp command to inform the program of the
>type of compensation since there is more than 1 possibility?
There are two handicap commands in GTP. One says, give me n handicap
stones. The other s
Le lundi 25 décembre 2006 15:35, Jacques Basaldúa a écrit :
> I have seen (many times) GnuGo not being able to
> win a H7 game to an opponent more than 10 kyu
> weaker. That happens because it had to invade
> unclear positions.
This is a feature of GNU Go :-)
GNU Go has very small invasion capacity
Le lundi 25 décembre 2006 00:46, Don Dailey a écrit :
>
> On Sun, 2006-12-24 at 13:54 -0800, David Fotland wrote:
> > There is no fixed relationship between ELO and handicap stones. Stronger
> > players have less variation in their play, so a handicap stone is worth more
> > ELO points for a stro
Vlad Dumitrescu wrote:
The best move may be a somewhat risky invasion -
of course one has to assume the partner will not
play perfectly, but everybody does that every time
anyway, right? Otherwise nobody would have any hope
to win and so nobody would play.
I agree. That's easy for humans to
Are you sure about this? Here is what I've seen on Wikipedia but I've
also seen this before from other sources:
Another departure from tradition is that ELO ratings are
calibrated by
winning percentage, not by stone handicaps. An extra handicap
stone
has mu
2006/12/25, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Sun, 2006-12-24 at 13:54 -0800, David Fotland wrote:
> There is no fixed relationship between ELO and handicap stones. Stronger
> players have less variation in their play, so a handicap stone is worth more
> ELO points for a stronger player than a
I was always taught in Chess to play the board, not the player.
But in principle this is wrong if your goal is to increase your
chances of winning the game.
The problem with playing your opponent is that if you don't know
the proper technique for doing this, it will distract you from
the real
Hi Hideki,
I think what I will do is use ELO and a simple formula for
determining handicap. The formula will impose a slight
curve on the value of a handicap stone, it will slightly
increase with each ELO point. In other words a stronger
player will benefit more from having an extra stone and
On 12/25/06, Jacques Basaldúa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hideki Kato wrote:
Nevertheless, I have certain experience (not with
MC) of computer go with handicap and I can tell:
Waiting for the opponent to blunder is only a good
strategy if the handicap is lower than it should.
E.g. 7 kyu difference
Hideki Kato wrote:
In Nihon Kiin's ELO system(1), 1000 ELO is 1 rank,
The Elo rating is based on two assumptions:
a. The performance of each player in each game is a
normally distributed random variable.
b. All players performance have the same standard
deviation. (This is controversial
Don Dailey: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>On the web I see that some ELO based GO servers assume 100 ELO is 1
>rank, and do exactly what I proposed, when they handicap they fold
>this into the ELO rating of the players for rating purposes.
In Nihon Kiin's ELO system(1), 1000 ELO is 1 rank, ex 25kyu is
[
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Dailey
> > Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 2:04 PM
> > To: computer-go
> > Subject: Re: [computer-go] Anchor Player
> >
> >
> > So really, wh
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Dailey
> Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 2:04 PM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Anchor Player
>
>
> So really, what I want to be able to do is:
>
> 1. Use the ELO rating system.
> 2. Determine how many ELO poi
At 07:12 AM 12/22/2006, you wrote:
Le vendredi 22 décembre 2006 14:50, Don Dailey a écrit :
[...]
> It seems that playing the best move possible (best in the sense of
> maximizing your territory gain) is not the best strategy when playing
> a handicap game. You literally have to play foolishl
On Sat, 2006-12-23 at 23:30 +0100, Łukasz Lew wrote:
> Don,
>
> I will cite it here:
> "If the players have agreed to use area counting to score the game
> (Rule 12), White receives an additional point of compensation for each
> Black handicap stone after the first."
>
> So AGA rules just do comp
On 12/23/06, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sat, 2006-12-23 at 20:20 +0100, Łukasz Lew wrote:
> On 12/23/06, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Based on some research I've done, it does make some sense to give some
> > compensation for handicap stones, because it makes it match
I think what I will do is see if there is an existing gtp command, if
not
I will see if there is a kgs extension for it - if there is I will
imitate
it with a cgos extension.
If a program doesn't honor the extension I'll just document how it works
and
what to expect.
I'm not going to fake
Quoting Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
The simplest thing is to just explain it on a web page, but there is no
explicit
way to tell the programs that white is being compensated (or not) for
the
handicap stones and that bothers me.
The first step is to inform future programmers of the compensa
On Sat, 2006-12-23 at 20:20 +0100, Łukasz Lew wrote:
> On 12/23/06, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Based on some research I've done, it does make some sense to give some
> > compensation for handicap stones, because it makes it match Japanese
> > and without it, the kyu system is not ba
On 12/23/06, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Based on some research I've done, it does make some sense to give some
compensation for handicap stones, because it makes it match Japanese
and without it, the kyu system is not balanced. I have doubts that
it's
perfectly balanced anyway, but
Based on some research I've done, it does make some sense to give some
compensation for handicap stones, because it makes it match Japanese
and without it, the kyu system is not balanced. I have doubts that
it's
perfectly balanced anyway, but that's a different subject.
So I think we will incl
It seems odd to me that there is no way to tell a program what system
is being used for compensation.
But there is still the issue of which compensation system to use. I
think
one system gives the handicap stone to the other side and the other just
deducts it.
I see a potential source of a lo
Quoting Christian Nilsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Yes, in chinese rules you need to compensate white for the extra area
you gain from the actual stones. The handicap is only meant to be the
extra strength/stability.
One can of course ignore this for the server. I just wanted to make
sure all progr
Le vendredi 22 décembre 2006 21:44, Don Dailey a écrit :
[...]
>
> I still have a hard time believing that the system scales very well
> across a 9 kyu range.
Handicap system works incredibly well, from very weak kyu to strong dan.
Moreover, the problem of the black players are the same whatever h
So really, what I want to be able to do is:
1. Use the ELO rating system.
2. Determine how many ELO points 1 stone handicap is worth.
3. " " """2 stones are worth
4. " " """3 stones are worth,
etc.
When two players are matched, the server giv
I'm glad you bring it up.
>From the same site, it appears there is no standard way of handling
this.
I will look to see what Tromp/Taylor says if anything.
It would be nice if we could simple equate handicap with ELO points, I
think it would be more accurate. We may find that 1 stone per kyu
y with
Chinese scoring.
Terry McIntyre
UNIX for hire
software development / systems administration / security
- Original Message
From: Christian Nilsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: computer-go
Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 12:46:40 PM
Subject: Re: [computer-go] Anchor Player
Yes,
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Don
Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
I'm trying to figure this out. If you get a 9 stone handicap, you have
to give back those 9 stones? So a 9 stone handicap is not quite as
much
as it seems although it's still pretty good.
You might want a Chinese-rules ha
>Yes, in Chinese rules you need to compensate white for the extra area
>you gain from the actual stones. The handicap is only meant to be the
>extra strength/stability.
To be slightly more specific, the extra compensation is specific to
area scoring rule systems. In a game with only two passe
Yes, in chinese rules you need to compensate white for the extra area
you gain from the actual stones. The handicap is only meant to be the
extra strength/stability.
One can of course ignore this for the server. I just wanted to make
sure all programs use the same rules. I don't know what the
tro
I'm wondering if the kyu system is screwed up without the compensation.
I still have a hard time believing that the system scales very well
across
a 9 kyu range. Would the extra compensation make the extreme handicaps
work better?
- Don
On Fri, 2006-12-22 at 13:36 -0700, Markus Enzenberger w
I'm trying to figure this out. If you get a 9 stone handicap, you have
to give back those 9 stones? So a 9 stone handicap is not quite as
much
as it seems although it's still pretty good.
- Don
On Fri, 2006-12-22 at 21:24 +0100, Christian Nilsson wrote:
> There's also the small issue of t
On Friday 22 December 2006 13:24, Christian Nilsson wrote:
> How is this compensation handled by the various programs on cgos, if at
> all?
>
> Check http://www.britgo.org/rules/compare.html#comp if you don't know
> what I'm talking about..
is there any logical explanation for this rule? I mean, W
There's also the small issue of the compensation given to white
because of the extra black stones on the board. Setting a modified
komi would break (MC-)programs with an internal rule for it. Not
setting it would break those who does not use that rule.
How is this compensation handled by the vari
Ok,
Well I'm inclined to go with the majority which seems to have turned
around
from the last time I polled.
Now the question: How to set it up?
Here are the options:
1. Use GTP handicap commands to set up game.
2. Send the appropriate pass commands to get the initial setup
to acc
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
on 9x9 boards. To make a long story short, I didn't see any evidence
that this algorithm is fundamentally disadvantaged in handicap games.
In fact, I agree with Remi's view that it is particularly *well*
suited to handicap games compared to territory based algorithms
I would like to see handicap games on CGOS.
AntIgo-4, playing on CGOS, uses MC/UCT and considers only win vs. loss,
ignoring margin of victory. I used a faster, dumber version of it to play a
number of handicap games against even weaker engines on 9x9 boards. To make a
long story s
Le vendredi 22 décembre 2006 17:25, Rémi Coulom a écrit :
> Here is the winning percentage I get with Crazy Stone at
> various handicaps, with a komi of 0.5, over 1 random simulations:
>
> 9 Stones: 0.74
> 8 Stones: 0.73
> 7 Stones: 0.69
> 6 Stones: 0.67
> 5 Stones: 0.63
> 4 Stones: 0.61
> 3
I think as a test, I would go with the full handicap system, I would
just refuse to match players that need more than 9 stones. I can
always cut it back to 4 or 6 later.
Why don't we view it as an experiment to gather a lot of statistics.
I can change back to ELO later.
The only question, and
Thanks for sending the statistics. I'll try them out later on my
programs too.
There is only 1 way to resolve this - maybe we should test it out
on a 19x19 handicap server. We can play a few weeks and then take
a look at the statistics later. I predict that gnugo will perform
better on handi
>I personally think small handicaps in 19x19 might be reasonable
because
>I think playing good moves is still a dominant factor - at least at
the
>levels our programs can handle. I would be reluctant to go beyond a
>few stones. I don't know what a good number is, but I'll take a
>somewhat
>e
Don Dailey wrote:
Hi Steve,
What you fail to take into considerations is that a monte/carlo
player may ruin it's chances before the weaker player has a
chance to play a bad move. The monte carlo player sees all
moves as losing and will play almost randomly.
I don't agree. Here is the winning
what i'm saying is that monte carlo is not
evaluating the game-theoretical value of the
board. what it is doing is looking for best
moves with respect to the function: "maximize
probability of win". probability of win is
not zero at the start, even with 6h. it is
lower than without handi, but no
Le vendredi 22 décembre 2006 16:03, Don Dailey a écrit :
> So it becomes far more important to play the opponent, not the board.
> All your hopes and dreams depend on your opponent, not the brilliancy
> of your moves (all of which lose.)
This is a problem of knowledge and estimation. In the beginn
Le vendredi 22 décembre 2006 16:21, Don Dailey a écrit :
> Hi Steve,
>
>
> In a high handicap game, a monte carlo program is
> likely to play the first few move randomly. Statistically
> they won't be able to see how C3 is any better than A19
> and so they will inadvertently give the weaker opp
Hi Steve,
What you fail to take into considerations is that a monte/carlo
player may ruin it's chances before the weaker player has a
chance to play a bad move. The monte carlo player sees all
moves as losing and will play almost randomly.
In botnoids game against mogo, once mogo achieved
a "
Le vendredi 22 décembre 2006 14:50, Don Dailey a écrit :
[...]
> It seems that playing the best move possible (best in the sense of
> maximizing your territory gain) is not the best strategy when playing
> a handicap game. You literally have to play foolishly in order to
> dupe your opponent into
> This is the strategy that one uses even in even games, right? One
> plays what one thinks is best given the position, and if the
> opponent's reply is less than optimal one tries to punish it (with
> various degrees of success, but that's another issue :-))
It's the strategy in even games, but n
> IMHO if I give handicap it is because the other
> player is weaker, so I
> don't *have* to play foolishly - he will make
> mistakes that I can see
> and exploit. If I still can't win, it means the
> handicap should be
> lowered...
and any go program would operate the same way.
it would look hope
Hi Don,
On 12/22/06, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It's easy to adapt monte carlo programs to have the goal of trying to
win as much space or territory as possible but many of us have studied
this as see that it seriously weakens monte carlo programs.
My (jokingly serious) point was th
Vlad and Stuart,
I'm not completely closed on this issue - but there is lot going
against it
It's easy to adapt monte carlo programs to have the goal of trying to
win as much space or territory as possible but many of us have studied
this as see that it seriously weakens monte carlo programs
Hi,
On 12/22/06, Stuart A. Yeates <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 12/21/06, Jacques Basaldúa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Handicap play is a *different* problem.
The rules of go include rules for handicapping.
It seems to me that this implies that a complete solution for the game of go
must includ
On 12/21/06, Jacques Basaldúa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Handicap play is a *different* problem.
The rules of go include rules for handicapping.
It seems to me that this implies that a complete solution for the game of go
must include the ability to play such games.
cheers
stuart
__
Hideki Kato wrote:
Increasing KOMI is much easier than placing stones, right?
Stuart A. Yeates wrote:
Increasing komi is much easier than placing stores, but a
much weaker representation of how go games are actually
played in the real world.
A very huge komi >30 points, apparently solves th
Again, this stuff doesn't work so well with Monte Carlo programs which
would
be totally frustrated starting from a losing position - they are all
about
finding moves that might win the game - not increase the territory
count.
Also, komi is like a fine tuning knob, stone handicap can be used to
ma
Stuart A. Yeates³ñ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Increasing komi is much easier than placing stores, but a much weaker
>representation of how go games are actually played in the real world.
Agree. But we'd better not to be bothered by fixed stones now, I
believe.
>cheers
>stuart
>
>On 12/15/06, Hideki
Increasing komi is much easier than placing stores, but a much weaker
representation of how go games are actually played in the real world.
cheers
stuart
On 12/15/06, Hideki Kato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Increasing KOMI is much easier than placing stones, right?
Jacques Basaldúa‚³‚ñ <[EMAIL
Increasing KOMI is much easier than placing stones, right?
Jacques Basaldúa³ñ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>I would like to take part in the 19x19 competition.
>I also prefer kyu rating to Elo, but I got the impression that
>you were relating kyu rating with handicap games (that is
>usually done by huma
> Handicap seems to be an integral part of the game of
> GO, however I
> won't be implementing it right away.Perhaps at a
> later time I will
> add it.
>
> When and if the time comes I will solicit
> suggestions, as this server is
> primarily for the use of developers.
for future considerati
There are two basically different handicap systems, right? One of them
allows free placement of the handicap stones and the other is fixed.
I would probably do the fixed version for consistency. To accommodate
programs that haven't implemented handicps I could just send play
commands along
Handicap seems to be an integral part of the game of GO, however I
won't be implementing it right away.Perhaps at a later time I will
add it.
When and if the time comes I will solicit suggestions, as this server is
primarily for the use of developers.
- Don
On Thu, 2006-12-14 at 19:05
I'd really like to see a way to work out the issue of handicap stones
so that they can enter into computer go competitions. In the past,
there's been strong complaints about stronger bots playing against
weaker bots. Would giving handicap make such match ups at least seem
more interesting?
I thi
I would like to take part in the 19x19 competition.
I also prefer kyu rating to Elo, but I got the impression that
you were relating kyu rating with handicap games (that is
usually done by human players).
I think handicap is a bad idea for computers. Handicap
requires human intelligence to unders
I think probably I just go with ELO, much simpler. I think later we
will want to have handicaps.Even at 9x9 Mogo is all by itself
although I expect other programs to eventually catch up or get close
later.
For the Anchor, I think I will take David suggestion and start with
AnchorMan. The
x with help of Wine(a
> free implementation of Windows on Unix) without noticeable performance loss.
>
> Best regards!
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Don Dailey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "computer-go"
> Sent: Wednesday, Dec
Le mercredi 13 décembre 2006 05:53, Don Dailey a écrit :
> Does a 1 kyu difference mean I can give you 1 stone if I am better and
> expect to come out about even?
yes, 1 handi is 0.5 komi.
>
> Does this all work out in a transitive way? If a 6 kyu can give a 7
> kyu 1 stone, and the 7 kyu can gi
esday, December 13, 2006 2:47 AM
Subject: [computer-go] Anchor Player
> If I set up a 19x19 server, we will need an Anchor player. Here is
> what I need from an Anchor player:
>
>
> 3. Linux binary - because it runs on the server itself.
>
> I suggest you use anchorman. It will be weaker on 19x19, but so will the
> other programs.
It depends on the programs. Gnugo or Aya scale very well on 19x19. Then
anchorMan would be far too weak for Aya and gnugo, and certainly other
programs. But we can try some experiments, and perhaps chang
t; To: computer-go
> Subject: [computer-go] Anchor Player
>
>
> If I set up a 19x19 server, we will need an Anchor player.
> Here is what I need from an Anchor player:
>
> 1. Non-deterministic - should not play same game every time.
>
> 2. Consistent - plays a
Le Mercredi 13 Décembre 2006 05:56, Don Dailey a écrit :
> On Wed, 2006-12-13 at 04:48 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > GnuGo is another possibility and has the advantage of being a well
> > > known quantity, but Gnugo fails to meet some of the criteria above
> > > such as being too determinis
t; Cc: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [spam probable] [computer-go] Anchor Player
>
>
> Hi Sylvain,
>
> I'm not worried about the ELO situation but you are right.
> When skill is measured by ELO you are talking about the
> probability of winning a game against any given
On Wed, 2006-12-13 at 04:48 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > GnuGo is another possibility and has the advantage of being a well
> > known quantity, but Gnugo fails to meet some of the criteria above
> > such as being too deterministic and using heavy resources.
But GnuGo uses a lot of memory, o
Hi Sylvain,
I'm not worried about the ELO situation but you are right. When skill
is measured by ELO you are talking about the probability of winning a
game against any given opponent, we just have to be careful how we
interpret or compare to other board sizes.
If 2 opponents are 50 ELO rating p
> GnuGo is another possibility and has the advantage of being a well
> known quantity, but Gnugo fails to meet some of the criteria above
> such as being too deterministic and using heavy resources.
Hello,
GnuGo at level 0 met almost all requirement I think. Perhaps too
deterministic, but I even
If I set up a 19x19 server, we will need an Anchor player. Here is
what I need from an Anchor player:
1. Non-deterministic - should not play same game every time.
2. Consistent - plays at the same strength at a level that is not
based on the power of the hardware. For instance Anch
If I set up a 19x19 server, we will need an Anchor player. Here is
what I need from an Anchor player:
1. Non-deterministic - should not play same game every time.
2. Consistent - plays at the same strength at a level that is not
based on
the power of the hardware. For instance Anch
94 matches
Mail list logo
