"For instance I am sure he will not sit merrily by and watch his opponent
consolidate a won game just so that he can have a "respectable" but losing
score. Dynamic komi of course does not address that at all."
This seems self evident, but it may actually be a treacherous conclusion.
Dynamic komi really only has one legitimate use. To avoid flat lining or,
taking handicap, saturated win rates.
This doesnt mean that the program needs to be "satisfied" with losing.(A komi
that put the win rate to 50% would model that)
A win rate range between 35 and 45 percent might make the program locally
ambitious, without attempting the impossible with ko threat
type moves.
Stefan
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Dailey
To: computer-go
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:10 AM
Subject: Re: [computer-go] Dynamic komi at high handicaps
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 5:58 PM, Mark Boon <tesujisoftw...@gmail.com> wrote:
2009/8/12 Don Dailey <dailey....@gmail.com>:
>
> I disagree about this being what humans do. They do not set a fake komi
> and then try to win only by that much.
I didn't say that humans do that. I said they consider their chance
50-50. For an MC program to consider its chances to be 50-50 you'd
have to up the komi. There's a difference.
If the handicap is fair, their chance is about 50/50. However, rigging
komi to give the same chance is NOT what humans do. The only thing you said
that I consider correct is that humans estimate their chances to be about
50/50.
One thing humans do is to set short term goals and I think dynamic komi is an
attempt to do that - but it's a misguided attempt because you are setting the
WRONG short term goal. The human will have a much more specific goal that
is going to be compatible with his hope of winning the game. For instance I
am sure he will not sit merrily by and watch his opponent consolidate a won
game just so that he can have a "respectable" but losing score. Dynamic komi
of course does not address that at all.
>
> I think their model is somewhat incremental, trying to win a bit at a time
> but I'm quite convinced that they won't just let the opponent consolidate
> like MCTS does. With dynamic komi the program will STILL just try to
> consolidate and not care about what his opponent does. But strong
players
> will know that letting your opponent consolidate is not going to work.
So
> they will keep things complicated and challenge their weaker opponents
> everywhere that is important.
>
It's difficult to make hard claims about this. I don't agree at all
that the stronger player constantly needs to keep things complicated.
Personally I tend to play solidly when giving a handicap. Because most
damage is self-inflicted. You can either make a guess what the weaker
player doesn't know, or you can give him the initiative and he'll show
you. I prefer the latter approach.
When done properly, I don't see how an MCTS program would consolidate
all the time. Doing so would keep the position stable while the komi
declines. As soon as he gets behind the komi degradation curve play
will automatically get more dynamic in an attempt to catch up.
The problem is: we're speculating. The proof is in the pudding.
Agreed.
- Don
Mark
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
