Christoph Birk wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Gunnar Farnebäck wrote:
Interesting. If I do the same with MonteGNU's fuseki database, which
is based on online learning from own CGOS games, and cut off at 200
samples I get:
E5 8101
| C3 2950
| | G5 1798
| | | G3 1145 (A)
And the resul
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Gunnar Farnebäck wrote:
Interesting. If I do the same with MonteGNU's fuseki database, which
is based on online learning from own CGOS games, and cut off at 200
samples I get:
E5 8101
| C3 2950
| | G5 1798
| | | G3 1145 (A)
And the results (win/loss %) ?
Chri
I wrote:
> Interesting. If I do the same with MonteGNU's fuseki database, which
> is based on online learning from own CGOS games, and cut off at 200
> samples I get:
>
> [...]
Since I started to prepare the tree with a cut off of 100 samples I
may as well post that too in case someone is interes
Don Dailey wrote:
> Here is the entire tree, where I drop nodes if they have less than 500
> samples. These are games between 1700+ players who are within 100 ELO
> of each others rating.
>
>
> E5 49.1% 19630
> | C4 49.6% 5894
> | | C5 49.9% 1558
> | | | B5 54.7% 788
> | |
Don,
That's a real interesting effort!
I was just reading the Horizon Chess page at
http://www.horizonchess.com/ , and the author has had
some success tweaking the opening book for his program
to reject lines of play which the program can't
exploit well, and keeping those lines where it is
shown
Here is the entire tree, where I drop nodes if they have less than 500
samples. These are games between 1700+ players who are within 100 ELO
of each others rating.
E5 49.1% 19630
| C4 49.6% 5894
| | C5 49.9% 1558
| | | B5 54.7% 788
| | | | C6 48.4% 566
| | C6 5
>From CGOS data it looks like WHITE has the better winning chances with
komi set at 7.5.
Take this all with a grain of salt because data like this can be
misleading. The weaker moves, for instance, may be better than they
appear due to the possibility that the poorer results are caused by
weaker
