I've gotten to a point where it probably makes sense to expose it to
actual users.
The location of the project is at http://plug-and-go.dev.java.net
It's new, so I wouldn't be surprised if there are a few little bumps
in the road still. But for anyone who'd like to start a bot, and who
wou
On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 17:19 -0200, Mark Boon wrote:
> So I understand from the above that when a playout leads to a win
> you
> add 1 to the wins.
> But in the code you subtract one when it leads to a loss.
This is just semantics. In the literal code a win is 1 and a loss is -1
but when I act
Maybe Don built it that way so that the playouts could handle integer komi and
the possibility of a draw. In that case, it would neither add one nor subtract
one.
Mark Boon wrote:
A post from Michael Williams led me to review this mail below once more.
I hadn't looked at the code of Don's re
A post from Michael Williams led me to review this mail below once
more. I hadn't looked at the code of Don's reference bot very closely
until now and instead relied on the description he gave below:
On 23-okt-08, at 14:29, Don Dailey wrote:
Let me give you a simple example where we set the
OK, after dicking about for a few hours with git and Mercurial I
decided against using any of them. I keep getting errors or
completely fail to understand how it works. It's just not intuitive
enough to get going quickly.
Moreover, if my goal is to get newcomers up and running quickly, I
On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 08:51 +0900, Darren Cook wrote:
> >>... the average game-length played was 119 moves. ...
> > ...
> > 111 is for random games. What the bots actually do is far from random.
>
> Or perhaps, if they can make a 9x9 game last 119 moves, it is not *that*
> far from random ;-).
I
On Sun, 2008-10-26 at 21:19 -0200, Mark Boon wrote:
> One more observation, something I found curious, is that according to
> the statistics twogtp put together, the average game-length played
> was 119 moves. I also noticed this was the number after the other two
> runs I had of 1,000 games
On Sun, 2008-10-26 at 21:10 -0200, Mark Boon wrote:
> When I look at CGOS right now my refbot TesujiRefBot has an ELO of
> 1286, JRef has 1290 and Cref has 1269. So evidence is mounting that
> my implementation, although completely different from yours, is
> conforming the definition you put
>>... the average game-length played was 119 moves. ...
> ...
> 111 is for random games. What the bots actually do is far from random.
Or perhaps, if they can make a 9x9 game last 119 moves, it is not *that*
far from random ;-).
Darren
___
computer-go
On Oct 26, 2008, at 7:19 PM, Mark Boon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
One more observation, something I found curious, is that according
to the statistics twogtp put together, the average game-length
played was 119 moves. I also noticed this was the number after the
other two runs I had of 1,00
One more observation, something I found curious, is that according to
the statistics twogtp put together, the average game-length played
was 119 moves. I also noticed this was the number after the other two
runs I had of 1,000 games each.
Since we made such a big deal about the average game
On 26-okt-08, at 20:38, Don Dailey wrote:
If you ran 10,000 games your score is amazingly close - you won't be
that close very often in 10,000 game samples. Of course I assume you
are testing this against a fully conforming version.
I don't know if it's so amazing. According to twogtp ther
If you ran 10,000 games your score is amazingly close - you won't be
that close very often in 10,000 game samples. Of course I assume you
are testing this against a fully conforming version.
So what exactly are you doing here to save time? My understanding is
that it has something to do with
On 25-okt-08, at 11:06, Don Dailey wrote:
I would be interested to see if your biased version can pass my
eventual
conformance tests. If it can, more power to you, I might use the
idea
myself.
I had it run 10,000 games over the weekend while away. The result is
49.9% (+/-0.5). I gue
I would be interested to see if your biased version can pass my eventual
conformance tests. If it can, more power to you, I might use the idea
myself.
- Don
On Sat, 2008-10-25 at 09:36 -0200, Mark Boon wrote:
>
> On 24-okt-08, at 21:19, Don Dailey wrote:
>
> > >
> > > \
> > > I'm now runnin
On 24-okt-08, at 21:19, Don Dailey wrote:
\
I'm now running a twogtp test against your ref-bot. After 1,000 games
my bot has a winning percentage of 48.8% (+/- 1.6) according to
twogtp.
That is well within 2 standard deviations so I don't think there is a
problem. In fact it is within 1 sta
On Fri, 2008-10-24 at 20:56 -0200, Mark Boon wrote:
> Hi Don,
>
> I fixed another bug and now I get an average game-length of 111.05,
> which seems to be closer again to what you have. A million
> simulations now takes about 35 seconds.
Is it a kind of bug that others might make? I wan
Hi Don,
I fixed another bug and now I get an average game-length of 111.05,
which seems to be closer again to what you have. A million
simulations now takes about 35 seconds.
I'm now running a twogtp test against your ref-bot. After 1,000 games
my bot has a winning percentage of 4
On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 16:04 -0200, Mark Boon wrote:
> OK, if the following is not the reason, then I don't know anything
> anymore :)
>
>
> My playouts allow multiple suicide. I believe Orego does the same. I
> found that not checking for that actually made things faster overall.
> But I bet that
By the way Mark,
If you find you are not doing one of the things below exactly the same
as I am, I would be willing to change my bot temporarily to see if it
makes the result match yours (assuming it's trivial to make the change.)
- Don
On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 13:53 -0400, Don Dailey wrote:
> On
OK, if the following is not the reason, then I don't know anything
anymore :)
My playouts allow multiple suicide. I believe Orego does the same. I
found that not checking for that actually made things faster overall.
But I bet that accounts for the longer average game-length.
If suicide i
On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 18:46 +0100, Claus Reinke wrote:
> > Thanks again for more explanations. I think the AMAF is clear to me now.
>
> For what it is worth: I read the AMAF section as indicating that the bots
> are to play using AMAF heuristics - random playouts, followed by playing
> the AMAF-sc
Just to be clear, the average length of the playout is what we are
looking for, not the average length of games that might be played from
genmove commands.
- Don
On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 15:00 -0200, Mark Boon wrote:
> Thanks again for more explanations. I think the AMAF is clear to me now.
>
>
>
On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 15:00 -0200, Mark Boon wrote:
> Thanks again for more explanations. I think the AMAF is clear to me now.
>
>
> >> When you say you count all the playouts starting from an empty board,
> >> then
> >> I have no idea how our outcome can be different by 3-4 moves,
> >> which i
> Thanks again for more explanations. I think the AMAF is clear to me now.
For what it is worth: I read the AMAF section as indicating that the bots
are to play using AMAF heuristics - random playouts, followed by playing
the AMAF-scored winning move, rinse and repeat. Which is why I thought
I sho
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 1:00 PM, Mark Boon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is still something I don't understand. Are there others who implemented
> the same thing and got 111 moves per game on average? I tried to look
> through some posts on this list but didn't see any other numbers published.
Thanks again for more explanations. I think the AMAF is clear to me now.
When you say you count all the playouts starting from an empty board,
then
I have no idea how our outcome can be different by 3-4 moves,
which is
coincidentally the average depth of a uniform tree of 1,000,000 moves
on
On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 13:33 -0200, Mark Boon wrote:
> Don,
>
> You're probably right and I'm misunderstanding how it's supposed to
> work.
>
> Let me quote te original description:
>
>6. Scoring for game play uses AMAF - all moves as first. In the
>play-outs, statistics are
Don,
You're probably right and I'm misunderstanding how it's supposed to
work.
Let me quote te original description:
6. Scoring for game play uses AMAF - all moves as first. In the
play-outs, statistics are taken on moves played during the
play-outs. Statistics are t
On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 09:38 -0200, Mark Boon wrote:
> Don,
>
> I have figured out the discrepancy in the average game length. As
> playout length I count from the start of the game, which gives me
> 114-115. I believe you count from the starting position where the
> playout starts. Because w
Don,
I have figured out the discrepancy in the average game length. As
playout length I count from the start of the game, which gives me
114-115. I believe you count from the starting position where the
playout starts. Because when I modify my code to do that I also get
111 moves per game
On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 20:29 -0200, Mark Boon wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 6:07 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > For one thing, komi is different. I used 0.5 for running this test.
> >
> > I would have use 0.0 but some implementations don't like even komi's.
> >
>
> But the
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 6:07 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> For one thing, komi is different. I used 0.5 for running this test.
>
> I would have use 0.0 but some implementations don't like even komi's.
>
But the komi should have no effect on the playout length. I started
out wit
On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 23:07 +0200, Denis fidaali wrote:
> [computer-go] From zero to playing on CGOS in 10 minutes
> ---
> Don Dailey drdailey at cox.net
> ---
> For one
[computer-go] From zero to playing on CGOS in 10 minutes
---
Don Dailey drdailey at cox.net
---
For one thing, komi is different. I used 0.5 for running this test.
I would have use 0.0 but
I use subversion and git. Git mostly for just my own personal
repository but it rocks and is my preference.
- Don
On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 20:28 +0200, Urban Hafner wrote:
> Mark Boon wrote:
> > I'm getting close to something I'd like to show people and get feedback.
> >
> > One thing to decide i
On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 16:16 -0200, Mark Boon wrote:
> When I run my playouts 1,000,000 times I get the
> following stats:
>
> Komi 7.5, 114.749758 moves per position and Black wins 43.8657%.
>
> That's a bit different from the 111 moves and 42% Don got in his
> reference bot. I haven't looked
Mark Boon wrote:
> I'm getting close to something I'd like to show people and get feedback.
>
> One thing to decide is how to make it public. Previously I used
> dev.java.net to host my project. But I stopped using it because I had a
> very slow internet connection and I was getting annoyed with t
On Oct 22, 2008, at 11:16 AM, Mark Boon wrote:
I'm getting close to something I'd like to show people and get
feedback.
One thing to decide is how to make it public. Previously I used
dev.java.net to host my project. But I stopped using it because I
had a very slow internet connection an
Mark Boon wrote:
> I'm getting close to something I'd like to show people and get feedback.
>
> One thing to decide is how to make it public. Previously I used
> dev.java.net to host my project. But I stopped using it because I had a
> very slow internet connection and I was getting annoyed with t
I'm getting close to something I'd like to show people and get feedback.
One thing to decide is how to make it public. Previously I used
dev.java.net to host my project. But I stopped using it because I had
a very slow internet connection and I was getting annoyed with the
time it took to c
Of course the server code is available on sourceforge, so you can set up
your own test site.
But I think all of that can be simulated with a smarter client. The
only think missing is the actual connection to the server. But this is
for debugging the bots mostly.
- Don
On Tue, 2008-10-21
On 21-okt-08, at 23:11, Michael Williams wrote:
You could have a copy of CGOS running on a different port that
pairs up anything that
connects to it against itself and starts a new game as soon as the
first game ends.
I don't know if it's a good idea to have it run against itself. I'm
You could have a copy of CGOS running on a different port that pairs up
anything that
connects to it against itself and starts a new game as soon as the first game
ends.
Don Dailey wrote:
Hi Mark,
Very good ideas. I have actually been intending for a long time to
give the client a test mod
Hi Mark,
Very good ideas. I have actually been intending for a long time to
give the client a test mode - it would test the bot and and find if
there were any problems with your bot as far as GTP or legal moves are
concerned. Or perhaps it would even play a random game or two locally
as if it w
Prompted by a few requests I had very recently with regards to the
computer-Go framework I once started, plus some free time between a
project I just finished and waiting for a visa to start my next, I
have started on a project probably best described by the title of
this message.
Wheneve
46 matches
Mail list logo
