Re: [Computer-go] Go in virtual reality

[Oliver Lewis]

It sounds like you are trying to develop a (fancy) client rather than a
bot, so you won't need knowledge of life and death, TT rules etc... I think
working through the GTP protocol and making sure you can handle all the
commands will give you the best checklist.  Here is the draft:
http://www.lysator.liu.se/~gunnar/gtp/gtp2-spec-draft2/gtp2-spec.html

Looking at it, I'd say some of things you should add are handling komi and
handicap (fixed or free), showing time settings and remaining time.  You
might also want to consider whether you're going to show chat (though I
don't think that comes over GTP).

Oliver


On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 12:43 AM, Gonçalo Mendes Ferreira 
wrote:

> First implement a small bot that plays legal moves including detecting
> superkos.
>
> Then read Bensons definition of unconditional life, the Tromp-Taylor rules
> and the GTP standard draft.
>
>
> On 09/07/2015 10:00 PM, Sébastien 'Cb' Kuntz wrote:
>
>> Hi list,
>> I'm working on a small immersive VR Go application (Oculus, HTC Vive etc)
>>
>> My goals are:
>> - play remotely against somebody else in VR
>> - play remotely against somebody on IGS
>> (- try to get better at Go)
>>
>> Since I'm only a beginner in Go,
>> I'm looking for the minimal set of functions that I need to implement in
>> order
>> to be able to play full games.
>>
>> Currently implemented:
>> - 19x19 board
>> - Place a black or white stone anywhere
>> - Can't play if not your turn
>> - Can't play if move is not legal (suicide or ko)
>> - Captured stones disappear from board
>> - Captured stones count
>> - Score estimation
>> - IGS: login, challenge a user, play move, receive move
>>
>> Planned:
>> - Pass
>> - Resign
>> - Undo
>> - Save to SGF
>> - Handicap
>>
>> Maybe:
>> - 9x9
>> - 13x13
>>
>> I am most probably missing some functions to complete the minimal set,
>> so any comment is greatly appreciated :)
>> Have a great day!
>> cb
>>
>
> ___
> Computer-go mailing list
> Computer-go@computer-go.org
> http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
>
___
Computer-go mailing list
Computer-go@computer-go.org
http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go

Re: [Computer-go] re comments on Life and Death

[David Fotland]

I agree that group strength can't be a single number.  That's why I classify 
groups instead.  Each classification is treated differently when estimating 
territory, when generating candidate moves, etc.  The territory counts depend 
on the strength of the nearby groups.

Monte Carlo has a big advantage in that it estimates the probability of winning 
the game, rather than my old approach of trying to estimate the final score.

David 

> 
> > For group strength I had about 20 classes with separate evaluators
> > (two clear eyes, one big eyes, seki, semeai, run-or-live, one-eye-ko-
> threat-to-live, dead-if-move-first, etc, etc).
> 
> Was group strength an object of several parameters or was it a single
> number derived from all those parameters? IMO, a single number cannot be
> meaningful in general.
> 
> > Groups strength was the core concept feeding into the full board
> evaluation, which tried to estimate the score.
> 
> But what WAS your group strength...?:)
> 
> Score estimation of a given position should also depend on territory
> counts, not only on group strength etc.
> 
> --
> robert jasiek
> ___
> Computer-go mailing list
> Computer-go@computer-go.org
> http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go

___
Computer-go mailing list
Computer-go@computer-go.org
http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go