On Mon, 15 Jun 2009, Brian Sheppard wrote:
Please don't do anything that decreases the frequency of games in order
to accommodate programs that want to play on multiple venues. Keep venues
strictly separate. Programs that want to play on multiple venues can just
log in multiple times.
I second
Separate rating pools are a given. I will not rate 2 separate time
controls as if they are the same, even though that is done in human games.
- Don
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Michael Williams <
michaelwilliam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I vote for 2 venues, each optional. Separate rating po
Whatever the eventual decision is - personally I would love a fast-play
venue as an alternative, with separate rating - please don't worry too
much about engines with fixed playouts, or engines that cannot handle
certain time limits.
The GTP client sitting between the engine and server will be
I vote for 2 venues, each optional. Separate rating pools is a must.
Łukasz Lew wrote:
Maybe we could agree that 1 day out of 7 in a week would be played on
6 times faster time controls.
The same bots, connections, logins, the same number of games per week.
Different rating of course.
This wou
Maybe we could agree that 1 day out of 7 in a week would be played on
6 times faster time controls.
The same bots, connections, logins, the same number of games per week.
Different rating of course.
This would be a problem only for hardcoded bots with no time control.
The advantage would be that w
>From what I can see, there is resistance to this idea - so what I'm going to
do is to provide venues which are standalone but makes it possible later to
add a time control.In other words for now there will be only 1 time
control per board size but the server will be flexible enough that other
I'm voting for 2 time settings: One normal and one fast (so maybe 5 min and 1
min on 9x9).
--
GRATIS für alle GMX-Mitglieder: Die maxdome Movie-FLAT!
Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome01
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go
:* Monday, June 15, 2009 7:02 PM
> *To:* computer-go
> *Subject:* Re: [computer-go] New CGOS - need your thoughts.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 9:43 PM, Jason House
> wrote:
>
> Given all the negative reaction to nested time control, I have to say I
> l
David
From: computer-go-boun...@computer-go.org
[mailto:computer-go-boun...@computer-go.org] On Behalf Of Don Dailey
Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 7:02 PM
To: computer-go
Subject: Re: [computer-go] New CGOS - need your thoughts.
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 9:43 PM, Jason House
wrote:
Given al
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 11:18 PM, Zach Wegner wrote:
> I'll express my opinion here, but keep in mind that my engine (cogito)
> has only played 44 games as of now on CGOS. I have a few problems with
> separate time controls.
>
> --It dilutes the rating pool. If there is only one time control,
> e
I'm for keeping the number of pools small, to keep their sizes large.
Peter Drake
http://www.lclark.edu/~drake/
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
I'll express my opinion here, but keep in mind that my engine (cogito)
has only played 44 games as of now on CGOS. I have a few problems with
separate time controls.
--It dilutes the rating pool. If there is only one time control,
everyone can play everyone. If there are separate time controls, th
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 4:02 PM, Brian Sheppard wrote:
>
> One thing I would *really* like to know is how to make something
> 10 times quicker using only 90 man hours. :-)
>
In my experience, the first ten times faster takes about the same time
extra as programming the original idea. It's the next
>Or they may not implement a proper time control algorithm and thus
>would not be able to adapt to 2 different time controls without being
>reinitialized with different parameters.
Programs with fixed trials appear to be common. There is no reason to
believe that they will complete faster games.
>The argument for longer time controls is that it encourages the
>development of new algorithms. New algorithms are usually slower. It
>might take 10 man hours to quickly code up a new idea. Sure we can
>optimize it to run 10 times quicker, but that takes another 90 man
>hours. We want to see how w
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 9:43 PM, Jason House wrote:
> Given all the negative reaction to nested time control, I have to say I
> like it. The pool won't be diluted as long as there's an obvious main venue.
A good compromise might be to have only 2 venues, one such as David
suggested and another
er time controls
> take too long for ratings to stabilize.
>
>
>
> David
>
>
>
> *From:* computer-go-boun...@computer-go.org [mailto:
> computer-go-boun...@computer-go.org] *On Behalf Of *Don Dailey
> *Sent:* Monday, June 15, 2009 4:21 PM
> *To:* computer-go
> *S
Given all the negative reaction to nested time control, I have to say
I like it. The pool won't be diluted as long as there's an obvious
main venue.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 15, 2009, at 7:20 PM, Don Dailey wrote:
I've been working on the new server and I'm almost at the point where
I c
> I agree with David. Have one time control per board size.
>
> I like the 5-minute controls for 9x9. You can take your program
> down for extensive offline testing and still get 100 games per day.
> That is far more data than you can analyze. Still, the speed is
> fast enough for ratings to stabi
>I don't like venues, because it spreads out the programs
>so there are fewer available opponents.
I agree with David. Have one time control per board size.
I like the 5-minute controls for 9x9. You can take your program
down for extensive offline testing and still get 100 games per day.
That is
PM
To: computer-go
Subject: [computer-go] New CGOS - need your thoughts.
I've been working on the new server and I'm almost at the point where
I can think about time controls - and since this is primarily for
developers, I would like to get your thoughts.
First, a brief explanation
I've been working on the new server and I'm almost at the point where
I can think about time controls - and since this is primarily for
developers, I would like to get your thoughts.
First, a brief explanation of how the time control works. When the
client starts up it will inform the server of
22 matches
Mail list logo
