We have recently had some conversations about scaling our program up to
13 x 13 to see what would happen. If CGOS13 were available I would
imagine we would have something running on it most of the time.
-Richard
David Doshay wrote:
Hello All,
It is my belief that the next big advance in comp
Thanks for that. It's nice to know that I'm not the only one.
David Doshay wrote:
I think we all understand trying to get code done for an event. I gave
up any hope of that with SlugGo a little while ago. Now I am only
doing parameter tweaking (hunting in too many dimensions, all in the
dark)
How things changes. You would never hear a comment like Remark c) below
concerning the "old" alpha-beta chess engines.
Olivier Teytaud wrote:
Dear all,
For information, our Taiwanese partners(**) for a ANR grant have
organized public demonstration games between
MoGoTW (based on MoGo 4.86
Taking recent comments out of context:
- how about what is possible with a computer that
has infinite memory and infinite speed? ... just try all possible programs ...
and
We also showed
theoretically how to obtain the answer without ever running the
algorithm ...
Perhaps we can all agree
terry mcintyre wrote:
If I recall correctly, someone spoke of constraining the opening moves
to the 3rd,4th,and 5th lines in the absence of nearby stones, or
something to that effect. What was the impact of this experiment?
For what it's worth, I tried a number of experiments along these lines
The hardware portion of this topic is very important, at least to me
since I'm in the market for a new laptop. :) The comment "today the
frequency means nothing" is my main concern and I worry even more if I
need to investigate all the other numbers associated with the CPU. I bet
the laptop ma
Thanks! That one CPU comparison is very helpful. So, indeed, there is a
lot more to worry about these days than simple clock speed. Has anybody
else done similar comparisons? :)
P.S. I'll almost surely pass on overclocking, but I had heard rumors
that current CPUs were running well under spee
Peter Drake wrote:
On Jul 20, 2007, at 8:04 AM, Jason House wrote:
I thought he was using the disjoint set! I'll recheck. Well written
disjoint sets average out to nearly O(1) operations for everything.
Yes -- O(log* n) to be precise, ...
At the risk of being accused of serious nit-picki
Of no particular importance I suppose, but did any one else get the
impression after looking at the picture (and the way he is holding the
stone) that he is not a regular go player?
Chris Fant wrote:
I'm just now reading the article.
"Monte Carlo techniques have recently had success in Go pl
Can anyone tell me a bit more about the go server Tygem? I am intrigued
by the apparent level of players that participate. Who runs this server?
Are serious games and/or tournaments played on it? What sort of time
controls are typically used there? Apparently professionals play on it
(as did Ma
Thanks for the interesting link. Indeed, some good reading there.
One quote that I've seen various versions of a number of times now: "
More interesting for the rest of us, AlphaGo is playing moves and styles
that all human masters had dismissed as stupid centuries ago."
Can any one point me
11 matches
Mail list logo
