or [EMAIL PROTECTED] ( text )
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message
From: Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: computer-go@computer-go.org
Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2007 2:28:21 PM
Subject: Re: [computer-go] early results
On Sat, 2007-01-27 at 11:40 -0500,
On Sat, 2007-01-27 at 11:40 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Handicap stones.
Yes, I may try to construct another study after this to work with
handicap stones and a program such as gnugo as a fixed target.
I'm not quite sure how to structure this study - perhaps for each
Lazarus level
Handicap stones.
- Dave Hillis
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: computer-go@computer-go.org
Sent: Sat, 27 Jan 2007 8:07 AM
Subject: Re: [computer-go] early results
On Fri, 2007-01-26 at 20:18 -0800, David Doshay wrote:
> I would hig
Le samedi 27 janvier 2007 14:58, alain Baeckeroot a écrit :
> Le samedi 27 janvier 2007 14:07, Don Dailey a écrit :
> > I agree that there is a pretty good amount of in-transitivity
> > with self-play.
> You can use the furiously fast and weak following programs:
> gnugo-1.2 (604 ELO on cgos 9
Le samedi 27 janvier 2007 14:07, Don Dailey a écrit :
> On Fri, 2007-01-26 at 20:18 -0800, David Doshay wrote:
> > I would highly recommend that you do your testing against
> > a different Go engine. Self-play is a weak indicator.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > David
>
> I agree that there is a pretty good
On Fri, 2007-01-26 at 20:18 -0800, David Doshay wrote:
> I would highly recommend that you do your testing against
> a different Go engine. Self-play is a weak indicator.
>
> Cheers,
> David
I agree that there is a pretty good amount of in-transitivity
with self-play.
However there is not a prac
I would highly recommend that you do your testing against
a different Go engine. Self-play is a weak indicator.
Cheers,
David
On 26, Jan 2007, at 5:39 PM, Don Dailey wrote:
Here are some early results on the scalability study.
Basically, level 2 beats level 1 83.6 percent of the time.
Here are some early results on the scalability study.
Basically, level 2 beats level 1 83.6 percent of the time.
level 4 beats level 2 90.0 percent of the time.
Where a level is number of play-outs divided by 1024
Approximately 300 ELO between levels. I fixed level 1 to have
an ELO o
