On 10/22/06, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How would it affect the game if KO's were handled like in chess? In
other words, you may repeat the position in situational superko style,
but you have achieved a draw if you do.
When you say 'like in chess' I suppose you mean the threefold
On 10/23/06, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> ... A region of 7 inside a benson> group cannot possibly support enemy life. So moves inside them> by either color do not improve the position.
Normally (under traditional Go rules) you would be right that a region of 7 surrounded
On 10/23/06, Tom Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> At 01:54 23/10/2006, you wrote:> > >There was a posting on this list with an example of a (contrived?)
> >situation where sacrificing a pass-alive group is appropriate, in order to> >win a ko that is more valuable. Is even #1 "100% admissible"?>
On 10/23/06, John Tromp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Who is to say that SSK doesn't lead to similarly bizarre situations?I'm not sure what you would consider bizarre, but the example I posted works the same for SSK.The problem is superko. For all common variants there are (rare) situations where an e
On 10/24/06, alain Baeckeroot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-10-23 at 09:41 -0400, Don Dailey wrote:> > When someone mentioned a position where a pass-alive group should be> > sacrificed - I wondered if it was also due to PSK issues.> >
This can also happen with normal rules, if one nee
On 10/24/06, alain Baeckeroot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Le mardi 24 octobre 2006 10:55, Erik van der Werf a écrit:> On 10/24/06, alain Baeckeroot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:>> > > On Mon, 2006-10-23 at 09:41 -0400, Don Dailey wrote:
> > > > When someone
Well at least we can be sure that for any two person game, if a position occurs 3 times, at least 2 will have the same player to move ;-)Erik On 11/8/06,
John Tromp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The difference between PSK and SSK also comes up in chess.Witness these events taking place yesterday in t
On 11/13/06, Chrilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There is of course the question how sure this number is. Is it some sort of
proove or just an example the author has found?
A simple upper bound can be calculated by number_of_intersections*4/5,
which gives 288 for the 19x19 board.
Each empty int
On 12/6/06, Magnus Persson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Note that to get these data I deleted all games where Valkyria lost on points,
because close to 100% of those games were not scored correctly. I do not know
if it is incompetence or outright cheating, but it happens a lot. Fortunately
Valkyria
Please stop this confusion.
Chinese scoring != Chinese rules
Japanese scoring != Japanese rules
Moreover, both Japanese and Chinese rules are to be considered
traditional rules.
E.
On 1/4/07, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I also think it's an important discussion for the future of GO
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 11:20 AM, Jaonary Rabarisoa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After a long search on the computer go mailing list archive and reading and
> reading again the paper of Gelly and Silver (ICML 2007) I didn't find
> answers to my question.
> In this paper they introduce a
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 2:36 PM, Jaonary Rabarisoa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So if I understand, at each node we need to play every possible action once
> at first, even many of these actions are surely non optimal. And this may be
> slow if the number of the possible action at this node is huge
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 3:10 PM, Jaonary Rabarisoa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So to sum up we have the following pseudo code :
>
> at a given node :
> - find the child (among the visited child only) that maximizes de UCT-RAVE
> value
> - if this maximum UCT-RAVE value is less than FPU value and i
On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 8:49 AM, Joshua Shriver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there a computer go forum?
http://www.computer-go.jp/
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Levente Kocsis did some research on move ordering in chess using
neural networks.
Apparently even a linear mapping already works surprisingly well. His
publications are at:
http://aurora.mlhci.sztaki.hu/www/index.pl/kocsis
Erik
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 2:29 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi...
On 6/23/08, Rémi Coulom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> a schedule was posted too:
> http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/icga/event_info.php?id=22
Not much details yet in this schedule...
I'm interested to participate, but I'd like to know some more details
first. I find it strange that the (penalty-f
On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 10:58 PM, Gian-Carlo Pascutto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Edward de Grijs wrote:
>>
>> GCP wrote:
>>
>> > Given how well the support for Beijing is (essentially refunding the
>> > plane tickets, you get more for participating in Beijing than winning
>> in
>> > Taiwan!), I
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 3:53 PM, Nick Wedd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Steenvreter no yes
Hi Nick,
I never said yes. At this point it is rather unlikely that Steenvreter
will participate. Steenvreter only runs on linux. Since the machines
in Leksand run windows and remote computa
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 6:18 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That always irks me when I hear this kind of thing. The world is basically
> windows "chauvinistic" and it's common to find little consideration given to
> any other platform.
> Did you know that you can create your own linu
> On 17, Jul 2008, at 9:39 AM, Erik van der Werf wrote:
>
>> ... simply using an ssh
>> connection to my machine at home would have been *much* easier...
>
> ___
> computer-go mailing list
> computer-go@computer-go.o
gt;
> Cheers,
> David
>
>
>
> On 17, Jul 2008, at 10:08 AM, Erik van der Werf wrote:
>
>> In what way would computer Go need to evolve?
>>
>> Erik
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 6:50 PM, David Doshay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 6:39 PM, Erik van der Werf
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 6:18 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Did you know that you can create your own linux environment without having
>> to "touch" the machine you
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 2:55 AM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Erik van der Werf wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 6:39 PM, Erik van der Werf
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 6:18 PM, D
On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 11:07 PM, steve uurtamo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i don't think that it's known to be exptime-complete.
http://www.ics.uci.edu/~eppstein/cgt/hard.html
E.
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.compu
On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 4:14 PM, Basti Weidemyr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What would you have done in a case like this? :)
Inspect the log file.
Erik
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo
On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Gian-Carlo Pascutto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> She was also a bit "unlucky" in the sense that Leela did not understand it
> was dead lost.
>
> I use quotes because had it understood better it was losing, it would have
> put up more of a fight :-)
If Basti is corr
On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 6:17 PM, Jason House
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Aug 11, 2008, at 12:02 PM, "Erik van der Werf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Gian-Carlo Pascutto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 7:58 PM, Gunnar Farnebäck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Erik van der Werf wrote:
>> For the final position in the game record any strong human player will
>> tell you that the game is clearly over. No points are left to be
>> gained and the resu
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 6:18 PM, Martin Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I
>> did not realize that his program, even with a large tree, would not be
>> able to recognize the seki. I knew of course that the original Mogo
>> playouts had this problem, but I thought all strong programs had
>>
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 12:00 AM, Gian-Carlo Pascutto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mark Boon wrote:
>
>> Not an expert on AB-search or UCT search but there's a subtle
>> difference I think. In AB search, if some processors have been
>> searching in a branch that is subsequently cut off, the work is
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 4:57 AM, David Fotland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> In late september there is a computer go contest in Taizhou, with cash
> prizes. They might cancel this contest due to lack of participation, so if
> you are thinking of going, please let them know today or tomorrow.
>
>
Maybe these are the same?
http://gobase.org/9x9/
Erik
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Olivier Teytaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> - There had been a TV program of professional 9x9 Go for years (some
>> member of this list have the records of the games played in this
>> program). Takemiya
On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 4:29 AM, Hideki Kato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David Fotland: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>At this point I think everyone would agree that E5 is the optimal first move
>>for black on 9x9.
>
> Some Japanese professionals say E5 is 1 to 2 points loss, though komi
> is 6.5 and wit
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 7:14 PM, "Ingo Althöfer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>>> Does someone here know of other (documented) attempts
>>> to solve 6x6 Go?
>>
>> Didn't Erik van der Werf do it under his rules?
>
> He did it for 5x5-Go, se
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 6:30 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't know if even size boards are special, but it seems to me that
> such small boards should have very high komi's. 4.0 seems pretty low
> but then I'm really no expert on komi's and I'm a pretty weak player so
> I'm not
On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 12:13 AM, Gian-Carlo Pascutto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd have some preference for playing the decisive game with komi = 6.5,
> but apparently thats not possible on KGS. I think with komi = 7.5 white
> is scoring very high (too high?) in the top games.
Last year (when t
>From all we know so far it is most likely that perfect komi is 7.0.
Even numbers lik 6.0 and 8.0 are unlikely because they always require
a seki with an odd number of shared liberties (in all optimal lines!).
Since IMO the first player should have a chance to win it seems
natural to set the komi
On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 11:31 AM, Markus Enzenberger
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gunnar Farnebäck wrote:
>>
>> To do that, just point your regular cgos client to trac.gnugo.org,
>> port 6867.
>
> what rules does GNU Go use in the 6x6 analysis?
>
> I connected Fuego configured with CGOS rules. After
On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 2:33 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I had heard somewhere that there are some who believe 8.0 is the right
> komi for 9x9 Chinese. I personally believed for a long time it was 7.0
> based on statistical data of games.However that can be misleading.
Do you
On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 1:23 AM, Gunnar Farnebäck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At http://trac.gnugo.org/6x6.sgf you can find an ongoing analysis of
> 6x6.
Nice! The main line looks correct.
It even has an interesting 59-ply deep variation which I don't
remember seeing before.
Erik
___
On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 9:46 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-10-08 at 11:47 -0700, Christoph Birk wrote:
>> On Wed, 8 Oct 2008, Don Dailey wrote:
>> > much more common.There were just a few games that used 6.5 komi
>> > because when I first started CGOS I had set 6.5 by
Maybe we could just do a vote?
Erik
On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-10-08 at 22:43 +0200, Erik van der Werf wrote:
>> > The only reason I would favor one over the other
>> > is if it turned out that in "pr
Sure, some long cycles have multi-stone captures.
Erik
On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 4:39 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You might be right. I have a liberal game length limit on my play-outs
> so I didn't notice this.
>
> Another game limiting rule could be something based on counting t
On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 5:03 PM, Jason House <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Oct 9, 2008, at 10:41 AM, "Erik van der Werf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> Sure, some long cycles have multi-stone captures.
>
> Can you provide an example?
http://ww
TED]> wrote:
> Which multi stone capture case still exists under random games?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 9, 2008, at 11:12 AM, "Erik van der Werf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 5:03 PM, Jason House <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
Don, thanks for providing these statistics!
Overall it suggests that on CGOS White only has a small advantage. I
still don't like this, but it is not nearly as bad as I initially
suspected.
The initially decreasing percentages are somewhat puzzling. One might
speculate that up to a certain level
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 11:47 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please correct me if I'm wrong, but are you saying that white is alive with
> TT-rules (=Tromp-Taylor?) or other rulesets with positional superko if black
> has not enough eyes left to fill as ko threats?
Yes.
> If that's true, I wou
Hi Dave,
This is a well-known problem with overly simplified rulesets.
TT-advocates don't care about the rare anomalies.
Did you notice that under positional superko you cannot take back the
ko after *any* number of consecutive passes? This is yet another
reason why in some cases filling an eye o
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 4:57 PM, Robert Jasiek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> In my opinion the goal of a ko rule is to prevent games from not ending.
>
> All restriction rules (about suicide, cyclic repetition, successions of
> passes) contribute to that goal. Ko rules
When a child has been sampled often through some other path a naive
implementation may initially explore other less frequently visited
children first. The new path leading to the transposition may
therefore suffer from some initial bias. Using state-action values
appears to solve the problem.
Erik
one ply search. In a full graph
representation the state-action values are the values of the edges.
Erik
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 4:03 PM, Mark Boon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 27-okt-08, at 12:45, Erik van der Werf wrote:
>
> Using state-action values
>
> appe
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 8:22 PM, Gian-Carlo Pascutto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ian Osgood wrote:
>> (For that matter,
>> it isn't a foregone conclusion that they are better; GNU Go won the 2008
>> US computer go tournament against a field MC programs.)
>
> Believe me, in match long enough to exc
IIRC under official Japanese rules at the end of the game all groups
with liberties shared between opposing colours are by definition in
seki. Therefore eventually (before counting) all dame have to be
filled.
Further, playing dame points is almost equally bad under Chinese rules
as it is under Ja
When unspecified always assume the natural logarithm.
For UCT this does not really matter; only a different tuning constant.
log10(x) == ln(x) / ln(10)
Erik
On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 3:22 PM, Mark Boon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just now I realized that I'm using the standard Java Math.log() fu
>> >> When White is the first player to pass than komi is changed
>> >> from 6.5 to 7.5 .
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 11:02 PM, David Fotland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It should make almost no difference, since on odd sized boards with area
> counting the game result will be the same unless there is
On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Rémi Coulom wrote:
> Erik van der Werf wrote:
>>
>> Hi Remi,
>>
>> There is a simpler solution: do not allow remote play at all.
>>
>
> I would be in favor of this solution. But this has no chance to make
> unanimity. Ev
Hi Remi,
There is a simpler solution: do not allow remote play at all.
Something else for the discussion. I would like to have a rule about
mandatory displaying the thinking process of the program so that both
operators have an idea of what is happening. Especially for remote
play I think this i
On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Mark Boon wrote:
> On Feb 1, 2009, at 11:29 AM, Erik van der Werf wrote:
>> Something else for the discussion. I would like to have a rule about
>> mandatory displaying the thinking process of the program so that both
>> operators have an idea
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 11:25 AM, Nick Wedd wrote:
> 1.) A neural net cannot explain its "thinking process" because it does not
> have any.
I have used artificial neural nets a lot in my go programs; it is
trivial to display predictions, but understanding them is of course
not always easy. Still
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 8:23 PM, George Dahl wrote:
> It is very hard for me to figure out how good a given evaluator is (if
> anyone has suggestions for this please let me know) without seeing it
> incorporated into a bot and looking at the bot's performance. There
> is a complicated trade off b
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 10:16 PM, Jonas Kahn wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Mar 2009, Matthew Woodcraft wrote:
>
>> Jonas Kahn wrote:
>>>
>>> You might be interested by this article, for a very complete and tested
>>> answer. Plus the idea of grouping, but a good part of the effect seems
>>> to me to be givi
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 9:03 PM, Matthew Woodcraft
wrote:
> Erik van der Werf wrote:
>> >> Jonas Kahn wrote:
>>> No there is no danger. That's the whole point of weighting with N_{s,a}.
>>>
>>> N_{s,a} = number of times the node s has been visited, st
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 5:28 PM, Ian Osgood wrote:
> The remaining strong classical programs you're missing are KCC Igo (Silver
> Star), Haruka, and Go Intellect (Goddess on Windows). I think Wulu is also
> still available for purchase.
FYI At least on 9x9 Go Intellect already used UCT in 2007.
E
rst move. Maybe you are
> remebering some interesting lines that starts with (3,2) and (2,2):
>
>> Subject: computer-go: 5x5 Go is solved
>> Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 15:27:04 -0100
>> From: Erik van der Werf
>> To: COMPUTER GO MAILING LIST
>>
>> Yesterday
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 7:59 AM, "Ingo Althöfer" <3-hirn-ver...@gmx.de> wrote:
> Nick Wedd explained:
>> stv is Steenvreter. Its creator is indeed Erik van der Werf,
>> whose KGS account is evdw. Its name is Dutch for "stone eater"...
>
> Congratula
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 10:39 PM, Nick Wedd wrote:
> Congratulations to Steenvreter, winner of yesterday's KGS bot tournament,
> with three more wins than its nearest rival!
>
> The results are now at http://www.weddslist.com/kgs/past/47/index.html
Thanks!
> As usual, I look forward to your repo
Last time I tried my program on kgs human players could simply declare
all bot stones dead and win regardless of the position. Did this
change?
Erik
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 8:28 AM, David Fotland wrote:
> Dead stones are removed by agreement. If there is no agreement, the human
> can continue pl
Ah, that explains it; should get my bot rated then... Thx!
Erik
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 12:55 PM, Isaac Deutsch wrote:
> That's only possible in free games, but not possible in rated games.
>
> Am 09.09.2009 um 11:56 schrieb Erik van der Werf:
>
>> Last time I tried
In my opinion NeuroGo was quite succesful with neural networks.
Magog's main strength came from neural networks. Steenvreter uses
'neural networks' to set priors in the Monte Carlo Tree.
Erik
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 2:26 PM, Petr Baudis wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Is there some "high-level reason" hypot
2009/10/26 Don Dailey :
> ... On the one hand we hear that MCTS has reached a dead end and there is no
> benefit from extra CPU power...
Just curious, who actually claimed that and what was it based on?
Erik
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@comp
On 1/14/07, Nick Apperson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: Nick Apperson <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
...
Essentially says that the maximum amount of information is proportional to
the 2D surface around it. Even if we live in a many-dimensional world (I
happen to believe we do), the area surrounding it
On 1/19/07, A van Kessel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Erik van der Werf's thesis was mainly about
transposition table replacement algorihtms, IIRC.
No it wasn't. I think you're confusing me with Dennis Breuker.
see: http://www.xs4all.nl/~breukerd/thesis/index.html
I have some knowledge on trans
On 1/19/07, Eduardo Sabbatella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> interesting question may be how to efficiently free
> memory from
> entries that become irrelevant in the continuation
> of a game (after
> the actual moves made have ruled out portions of the
> full game-graph),
> but this is probably
On 2/5/07, Hideki Kato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Łukasz Lew:
>Draw means win
>for white, so 7,5 is the same as 7.
It's ok for almost all games
What's the exception?
Draw by long cycle repetition shouldn't be the problem because we only
need this trick directly after counting intersections
On 2/5/07, Hideki Kato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Erik van der Werf: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>On 2/5/07, Hideki Kato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> Łukasz Lew:
>> >Draw means win
>> >for white, so 7,5 is the same as 7.
>>
>>
Nick,
The basic idea of what you're describing is well known. It was first
published by Antti Huima several years ago. Unfortunately though, his
implementation was flawed. I didn't check your code but likely it
suffers from a similar defect. It is possible to fix the defects in
Huima's scheme. If
On 2/10/07, Łukasz Lew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 2/10/07, Antoine de Maricourt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If there is strong interest, I can post the scheme.
Please do.
Since Antoine claims there is only on solution I might as well post mine ;-)
mirroring: [abcdefgh] -> [hgfedcba]
rotati
On 2/10/07, Jacques Basaldúa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
But the question is: Does someone do the opposite, i.e. "playing"
with the hash values to make then *stronger*?
And then we get another small questions with a dangerous answer...
Just search the archive for "BCH construction".
E.
__
On 2/11/07, Jeff Nowakowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 2007-02-11 at 10:59 -0200, Mark Boon wrote:
> Don't be discouraged please. The big-mouths don't always represent
> what the majority thinks.
The opinions expressed for not wanting to move to a forum were polite
and thoughtful. Call
On 2/12/07, Jacques Basaldúa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Erik van der Werf wrote:
> And then we get another small questions with a
> dangerous answer...
1. What makes a question big or small is not a personal
preference, but the number of millions times it happens
during a game.
Hi Jacques,
On 2/13/07, Jacques Basaldúa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Erik
> And what distinguishes database look up from things like transposition
> table look up? Why wouldn't one use database look up during tree
> search?
The interest in rotation/mirror. In database search, what is good fo
On 2/12/07, Phil G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
For those doing a lot of bit logic in their computer go programs, you might
be interested in this collection of highly optimized methods for doing
things with "bits"
(like counting bits sets in parallel and computing the minmum or maximin of
two inte
Here's a link:
http://erikvanderwerf.tengen.nl/pubdown/bitcounters.c
Have fun,
Erik
On 2/13/07, Jim O'Flaherty, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Erik,
I am.
Jim
- Original Message ----
From: Erik van der Werf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: computer-go
Sent: Tuesday,
-- Forwarded message --
From: Nic Schraudolph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Feb 14, 2007 2:18 AM
Subject: Fwd: [computer-go] Zobrist hashing with easy transformation comparison
To: Erik van der Werf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hi Erik,
could you please forward the following to
On 3/7/07, Harri Salakoski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi
As reading
http://www.cs.unimaas.nl/~vanderwerf/pubdown/solving_go_on_sm
all_boards.pdf
don't understand chapter 5.1. Following 3*3 go game.
Maybe you were not actually reading the above link, but chapter 5 of my
thesis? The thesis co
Given your original description I'm not so sure if what you're doing should
actually be called a nearest neighbor method. It may be more like a decision
tree... This said, the curse of dimensionality is a general problem which
can come up with all similarity/distance based approaches using finite
On 3/25/07, forrest curo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Does this bunch ever get around to the merits of various ways of
representing the board and arriving at moves?
Sure, e.g.:
http://computer-go.org/pipermail/computer-go/2006-December/thread.html#7452
For example, something I suggested the l
On 4/4/07, Sylvain Gelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Of course as experts, you should have noticed errors on this newsletter, as
e.g. MoGo developed by the inventors of UCT in hungary :-).
Yes, the text clearly showed that the guy didn't do his homework.
One (far-fetched) explanation might be b
On 4/4/07, Sylvain Gelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However, it would be accurate to play a few thousand games at 7.5 komi,
> then a few thousand and 6.5 and compare the white/black win percentage. The
> one closest to 50% would be the one to use.
If some are interested by the results, I jus
On 4/4/07, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 2007-04-04 at 23:35 +0200, Erik van der Werf wrote:
> Traditionally the weaker player plays black and it seems reasonable
> that starting the game should not be a disadvantage. Consequently, if
> these statistics are at all
On 4/5/07, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 2007-04-04 at 23:35 +0200, Erik van der Werf wrote:
> Sylvain, could you run the same test on 7x7 to verify that there the
> 'correct' komi would be 9 (try 8.5 vs 9.5)?
I can already tell you what will happen, I h
On 4/5/07, Sylvain Gelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Sylvain, could you run the same test on 7x7 to verify that there the
> > 'correct' komi would be 9 (try 8.5 vs 9.5)? If MoGo wouldn't converge
> > to 9 we probably shouldn't have much confidence in the generalisation
> > of the above result
On 4/6/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
When it comes to a search, one need to ask that is my evaluation function
perfect?
There are exceptional cases in the late endgame and on tiny boards,
but in general this is not an interesting question (because it
obviously won't be perfec
On 4/6/07, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, 2007-04-06 at 12:43 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Alpha/Beta cutoffs only make sense when calling the evaluation
> function twice on the exact same position can be guaranteed to
> provide
> the exact same value. This is obviously not th
On 4/6/07, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
However, there is nothing wrong with using alpha beta
search with an evauation function that is not deterministic.
I agree that some limited amount of non-determinism isn't necessarily
a bad thing, and in some cases it actually helps (e.g., when
On 4/10/07, alain Baeckeroot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Le lundi 9 avril 2007 14:06, Don Dailey a écrit:
> But the point is that
> as long as you can provide time and memory you will get improvement
> until perfect play is reached.
Is there any proof that heavy player converge toward the same so
On 5/1/07, Peter Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Like most of the UCT programs (I believe), Orego adds one tree node per
Monte Carlo run. At present, this node includes data from the run that
created it. Thus, after the first run, my tree looks like this:
ROOT: 1/1 wins
CHILD A: 1/1 wins
Igno
On 5/7/07, Peter Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Iterating through the children should not be a significant time hit,
because (a) UCT trees tend to be quite shallow, rarely more than 5
moves deep, and (b) the vast majority of nodes are leaves.
Right, but IMO the real reason why you want to exa
On 5/11/07, Chris Fant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How much improvement should one see in a UCT program after adding a
transposition table?
Hard to say in general because this depends on how deep the tree goes,
the allocated search time, etc. For shallow trees I suspect that you
might even play
On 5/17/07, Rémi Coulom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Álvaro Begué wrote:
> There are many things in the paper that we had never thought of, like
> considering the distance to the penultimate move.
That feature improved the effectiveness of progressive widening a lot.
When I had only the distance to
1 - 100 of 244 matches
Mail list logo
