RE: [computer-go] Test position set for MC programs
Hi all, thanks Yamato for the positions. FirstGo version 330 results: 1k playouts - 27/50 passes10k playouts - 30/50 passes100k playouts - 33/50 passes (100k takes about 8 seconds/position average on P4 2.67Ghz.) Edward. _ De mooiste afbeeldingen van Angelina Jolie vind je met Live Search http://search.live.com/images/results.aspx?q=angelina%20jolieFORM=MIINTM___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
RE: [computer-go] How to get more participation in 19x19 CGOS?
Just for the record, For 19x19 I like a time setting of 5 to 10 minutes (max) per side. My main two reasons: 1) It takes to long to establish a good rating estimate. 2) For the near future I can only run on a single cpu machine at night. During the day my wife is using this computer, and it is much to slow let the program run at the same time. Then when I want to stop the game gracefully, it takes too long (for me) to wait for the game to stop with long time controls (this was up to one hour). That is why I was not competing on 19x19 cgos... Cheers, Edward _ De mooiste afbeeldingen van Angelina Jolie vind je met Live Search http://search.live.com/images/results.aspx?q=angelina%20jolieFORM=MIINTM___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
RE: [computer-go] Re: A thought about ratings.
Nobody really believes ratings are 100% right on the money accurate. But it's silly not to use the most correct method possible. Ratings are a very useful approximation to reality and you might as well get as close to that reality as you can.- Don But then we have to take the amount of computing power (nr of cpu and speed of cpu's) into account. This has a major influence on UCT/MC programs. Otherwise we only test the package of progam+computer together and not the progam alone. Speed differences of more then 10 exists in the rating pool... --Edward _ De mooiste afbeeldingen van Angelina Jolie vind je met Live Search http://search.live.com/images/results.aspx?q=angelina%20jolieFORM=QBIR___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
RE: [computer-go] Re: Update of MoGo binary release, and windows version available!
Hi, I have a solution now, thanks for all the help. For those interested, the solution for me: I use a ruby script (thanks Chris), to open de mogo program (with IO.popen) and with gets en puts it is possible to read the commands from stdin, and outputs these commands to mogo. Obvously ruby can send these commands without EOF, so mogo does work properly this way. I noticed however that is could be necessary to wait for the reply of mogo before sending another command, because otherwise it sometimes fails. Thanks, Edward. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: RE: [computer-go] Re: Update of MoGo binary release, and windows version available!Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 11:23:42 +0100 Hi to all, Can someone help me with this problem, for which I cannotfind a solution:I am trying to run MoGo in an automatic way, using thecygwin toolkit.The problem in its simplest form is this:If I use MoGo on the command line, typing the commands whichare send by stdin (i suppose) it works perfectly.If I make a file with command like: boardsize 9 genmove wThen MoGo will continue to perform a genmove, and can onlybe stopped by killing it.I vagely suspect that it has something to do with non-blockinginput, but I also do not know all the aspects of this.To be honest, I tried to implement pondering using non-blockinginput, but that did not work out this way, because of some alikeproblems... Now I can run GoGui, and this program seems to work finewith Mogo, so it must be possible to interact automatically. Can you help me?What am I doing wrong? Thanks,Edward Pas je zoekresultaten aan op JOUW wensen met Live.nl! Live.nl _ http://www.live.com/?mkt=nl-nl Live.nl___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
RE: [computer-go] Re: Update of MoGo binary release, and windows version available! (repost)
Thanks Hideki, Chris and Jacques for your replies.
Hideki wrote:
Then, you can make a very simple program that passes a file to stdout
first and passes stdin to stdout after the end-of-file of the file.
And use it as a.out file | mogo arguments.
Is this not the way a tail -f works?
This is the method I use with gnugo to let te programs play against
each other. The communication between the programs and server program
are all using files. This seems fast enough, while I can check all
the communications which took place.
This tail -f fails in the same way.
To check things even more, I tried to communicate using C with popen():
FILE *ptr;
if ((ptr = popen(mogo --9 --nbTotalSimulations 3000 mogoout, w)) !=
NULL)
{
fprintf(ptr, boardsize 9\n);
fprintf(ptr, genmove b\n);
sleep(60);
}
But the result is the same, after these commands, mogo still continues to
perform multiple genmoves. I am puzzled here...
I will look at the ruby script, and there are also twogtp scripts of gnugo
in python, perl etc. which I could check.
Edward.
_
Probeer Live.nl
Probeer Live.nl: zoekmachine van de makers van MSN! ___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
RE: [computer-go] Re: Update of MoGo binary release, and windows version available!
Hi Hideki, The file is used by: cat file | mogo arguments Adding quit to the file lets mogo quit the game, but I want to let mogo wait for the obvious next command like play b vertex Normally I use the pipe with a self made server program that send a new line through the pipe each time one of the two programs, which are competing, generate a move. This works for my program, and also for gnugo, but mogo reacts differently. Maybe I am using a wrong method, or there are much better ways to do this, please let me know. How do others let programs play against each other while maintaining full control as a server? Thanks, Edward. Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 22:17:03 +0900 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [computer-go] Re: Update of MoGo binary release, and windows version available! To: computer-go@computer-go.org Adding quit does not help? Edward de Grijs: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi to all, Can someone help me with this problem, for which I cannot find a solution: I am trying to run MoGo in an automatic way, using the cygwin toolkit. The problem in its simplest form is this: If I use MoGo on the command line, typing the commands which are send by stdin (i suppose) it works perfectly. If I make a file with command like: boardsize 9 genmove w Then MoGo will continue to perform a genmove, and can only be stopped by killing it. I vagely suspect that it has something to do with non-blocking input, but I also do not know all the aspects of this. To be honest, I tried to implement pondering using non-blocking input, but that did not work out this way, because of some alike problems... Now I can run GoGui, and this program seems to work fine with Mogo, so it must be possible to interact automatically. Can you help me? What am I doing wrong? Thanks, Edward _ De mooiste afbeeldingen van Angelina Jolie vind je met Live Search http://search.live.com/images/results.aspx?q=angelina%20jolieFORM=QBIR___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
RE: [computer-go] programs at the US Go Congress
What would get YOU to bring your program to the Congress? What would you like to do once you are there? Cheers, David Hi, due to my limited funding: compensate the travelling costs, or make it possible for me to send the program, so it can run on a local computer there, or by remote computing (could KGS be used for this?) Cheers, Edward _ Live.nl: je eigen persoonlijk startpagina met nieuws en feeds die JIJ belangrijk vindt! http://www.live.com/getstarted.aspx___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
RE: [computer-go] Re: Update of MoGo binary release, and windows version available!
Hi to all, Can someone help me with this problem, for which I cannot find a solution: I am trying to run MoGo in an automatic way, using the cygwin toolkit. The problem in its simplest form is this: If I use MoGo on the command line, typing the commands which are send by stdin (i suppose) it works perfectly. If I make a file with command like: boardsize 9 genmove w Then MoGo will continue to perform a genmove, and can only be stopped by killing it. I vagely suspect that it has something to do with non-blocking input, but I also do not know all the aspects of this. To be honest, I tried to implement pondering using non-blocking input, but that did not work out this way, because of some alike problems... Now I can run GoGui, and this program seems to work fine with Mogo, so it must be possible to interact automatically. Can you help me? What am I doing wrong? Thanks, Edward _ Nooit meer offline met Windows Live Messenger op je mobiele telefoon http://www.getlivemobile.nl/___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
RE: [computer-go] 19x19 CGOS
Hi all, For CGOS 19x19 I prefer a short time control (10min/game) because: 1) More quickly a more accurate rating can be established. I do think that the rating differences inbetween programs due to a shorter time setting do not change significantly (more than a few stones), while the rating difference of a newer program version (an update) within the pool can be shown with a better accuracy, due to the more games that will be played. 2) I am using my (single cpu) computer also for other things, and if I want to stop the cgos calculations I don't want to wait up to one hour before I can use it again. (It also takes longer before the first game starts). Just my opinion here. I noticed on cgos 19x19 that when crazystone stopped playing, it's name was not displayed on the cgos list anymore. What's is the cause of this? Edward. Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 07:32:42 +0900 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [computer-go] 19x19 CGOS To: computer-go@computer-go.org I prefer shorter time control. The object I use cgos is to measure my program's performance against other programs. Cgos is not a tournament in any sense. It should be a tool for developers, I believe. Then, fairness is not so important because I can estimate my program's performace at longer time control easily. Most important thing for me is to know my program's rating _quickly_. I'd like to ask shorter time settings. -Hideki Olivier Teytaud: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Ok for 30 minutes after the testing phase (for the tests I guess that 10 minutes is too long :-) ). For the moment I am trying to get the authorization of opening a port for socket connection - for the moment I guess only people in the same laboratory as me can connect to the machine, what is not a satisfactory behavior :-) Olivier ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kato) ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ _ Nooit meer offline met Windows Live Messenger op je mobiele telefoon http://www.getlivemobile.nl/___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
RE: [computer-go] 19x19 CGOS
Subject: RE: [computer-go] 19x19 CGOS From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sun, 2007-10-28 at 11:54 +0100, Edward de Grijs wrote: Hi all, For CGOS 19x19 I prefer a short time control (10min/game) because: 1) More quickly a more accurate rating can be established. I agree with Don. 10 minutes sudden death is brutally short for 19x19. You are limiting the pool and strength of programs available for CGOS. Hi, maybe so, but can you name some programs which cannot cope with 10 minutes thinking time for 19x19? Note that my own program is a MC program which will play weaker in relation to for instance gnugo which the shorter thinking time, but I find that not important because as a programmer I want to see the relative progress over time. If all you want is a quick and dirty rating for minor updates, why don't you just run your program against Gnu Go and/or MoGo at fast time settings on your own machine? Then when you think you have a stable and significant improvement, run your program on CGOS for a beefier test? This is how MoGo achieved dominance in 9x9. This is just what I do with about 1 minute for each 13x13 game :-) In the past it happened that there were so many MoGo versions running on CGOS that it was questioned here in this mailing list if this could be reduced to create more diversity, if I remember this correctly. So CGOS was used by the MoGo team to get in impression about the rating of different updates in relation other programs then gnugo. And diversity is also the reason I like to test on CGOS. If it takes to long to establish a rating on CGOS I more often will use my own pool of programs (only gnugo for now) but then with different programs available, instead of establish a rating on CGOS which takes about 120 games or about 60 hours (estimation) of computer time. Maybe I am confused about the goals of CGOS? I thought that programmers could use it to get a good impression of improvements over time. And I also like to see the progress of other programs over time. I think this is also interesting to see for others. Edward. _ Live.nl: je eigen persoonlijk startpagina met nieuws en feeds die JIJ belangrijk vindt! http://www.live.com/getstarted.aspx___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
RE: [computer-go] 19x19 CGOS
If I combine some reactions so far I understand that the main motivation to have 30min/game or longer time controls is that that is more comparable to the pace of humans, and that is is more easy for some new programs (not MC based) I can imagine that some humans will argue that blitz ratings are not to be trusted, but I think that they can be. For MC programs this only mean that they are about 1 or 2 stones weaker (at 10 min. instead of 30 min) in relation to (already fast) traditional programs. The resulting difference against humans I do not know. If someone builds a different engine, (not MC) I can image that the time can be important, but only if the program needs that kind of time control. For MC programs one have to realise that the difference between the best program and the average programs is about 8 stones or more, (a very rough estimation of mine). So the time control only accounts here for only about 2 stones, which will not help the new programs to perform much better. Those large differences could be corrected by introducing handicap stones, but I realise that will not be easy to combine with an elo rating scale. This brings me to the beginning of the newly started CGOS 19x19: I thought one of the first goals was to get an impression between the strenght of MFGO and CrazyStone. I do not see any discussions related to that, while it is very interesting what is happening (or has happened already) Crazystone was about 2000 elo, mfgo is about 1800. The CrazyStone row has dissapeared because not enough games were played, so there will be a larger standard deviation around those values (I expect a 1 sigma value of about 50 elo. It would be interesting to incluse those numbers on every row (Don?)) What I think is happening is that Crazystone seems to be about 7 stones (or more) stronger than MFGO at these time controls, when CrazyStone will use 6 cores or so (which Remi has used in the past). How: Crazystone used about 3 minutes for each game, one using 1 cpu, so it has handicapped himself (maybe Remi is nice to David?). When using almost the full 30 minutes it will be about 3 stones or 300 elo stronger. Combined with 6 cores that will be another 2 or 3 stones or 250 elo. So we are looking at Crazystone 2550 elo, MFGO 1800 elo which roughly corresponds to 7 stones! Just food for though, and my opinion and my rough estimates which will be erratic (with a certain deviation:-) Edward _ De mooiste afbeeldingen van Angelina Jolie vind je met Live Search http://search.live.com/images/results.aspx?q=angelina%20jolieFORM=QBIR___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
RE: [computer-go] Mertin's private 9×9 19×19 tournam ent
Hi Stefan and all, I really want to ask Eric van der Werf, if I could get a copy of his program steenvreter, which won gold in Amsterdam 2007. Do you have some contact with him or with some other programmers in the Netherlands? No, not directly. I suspect they are reading this conversation, so they could reply. Or you can send them email to their adress of this mailing list... Yes, I have thought exactly of this and want to do it if I can find the time I need - unfortunately I am not a programmer yet - Peter Woitke did make every programming work I asked him for my tournaments! But he is very busy working on Suzie now. Oh, I thought that the work on Suzie had stopped after Chrilly discontinued the work for it... So I want to try these things myself - I am quite sure I would find all the help I would need here or on other forum+mailing lists - so it is really only a question of time ... BtW. Hiroshi Yamashita seems to have realized exactly what we just think of - interesting coincidence! See the games CrazyStone vs. KCC Igo discussed here in the list. Yes, I noticed the other discussions. Make me wonder why the others seems not interested in asking you to make for instance the CGOS 19x19 pool more interesting by creating a continuous pool of (rotating) contenders. A time ago when I tried to connect to 19x19 it was already shut down, because the lack of interest. I think there always will be times when interest is low, while at other times more programs will be present. The 19x19 interest will increase more and more over the next year or so I think when more MC programs will enter the 19x19 arena. Today nearly every program has efficient scalability with time, so I have to set a time limit but I don´t want to test things like time-management! My purpose ever was to test the playing strength and nothing else. If a program crashes while playing, the game will be repeated and if possible even continued exactly at the point where it was left. I report bugs and everything that goes wrong but I am not testing functionality and stability. So I think I will set the time as one descripting part of the playing engine comparable to the number of the version of the program. E.g. there could be one engine MoGo(10min/game) and another engine MoGo(30min/game)! And firstGo, how strong do you think it is by now on 9x9 and on 19x19? I only worked on 19x19 this year. Yesterday I tried 9x9 on CGOS again, but my bug detectors were alarming for this size, so I had to stop it again (debugging needed). Last version did about Elo=2020 For 19x19 it's 8k on KGS now. I am always running on a slow one processor machine. I do not have a multicore yet, so I did not program anything for multicore. How will you cope with multicore usage in your tournament? I noticed other programs to be about 8 times faster on a 4 core, so my program could be about 5k on KGS, if I could use such a multicore machine (and programmed my software to use it). (On CGOS with 9x9 this could mean an Elo of about 2300 on a 4 core machine). Edward _ Nooit meer offline met Windows Live Messenger op je mobiele telefoon http://www.getlivemobile.nl/___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
[computer-go] Mertin's private 9×9 19×1 9 tournament
Hello all, is something known about this tournament yet? In http://www.computer-go.info/events/future.html is stated that this tournament would take place this year in Germany, but so far no news. Does somebody have more information? Edward _ Probeer Live.nl Probeer Live.nl: zoekmachine van de makers van MSN! ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
RE: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo
Hi Sylvain and all, Thank you very much for sharing the binaries. I am very interested in a windows binary to use MoGo as an extra sparring partner, (I cannot use linux at this moment), I do not mind if the binary is slower, because even then the MoGo program will be stonger then my program... Goodbye Sylvain and have much success in your life. Edward. Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 21:20:59 +0200 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: computer-go@computer-go.org Subject: [computer-go] Binary release of MoGo Hi all, I am pleased to announce a binary release of current version of MoGo. It is specially designed for players but of course it may be interesting for some of you as a benchmark. You download it and see the instructions there: http://www.lri.fr/~gelly/MoGo.htm Of course, please feel free to talk of it around you, share the link, and put the link on your webpage :). Please distribute the link but not the package directly, so that I keep track of the distribution, and maybe put some fixes, so that people always get the latest version. Unfortunately, only the linux version is available (for the moment?). I wanted to wait for the windows version to be available at the same time, but it is 2 times slower than the linux version(!!), so I decided not to distribute it for the moment. I use cygwin for that, and maybe the reason is that cygwin has only gcc 3.4.2, and which produce a much slower binary. If anyone has a solution, I would be pleased to put the windows version as soon as possible. I would also take this occasion to say goodbye to you all, and thank you for all the discussions. I now finished (and almost defended :)) my PhD, and my work on MoGo is finished. So it is very likely that I will not make any further contribution to MoGo. I would like to say that I spent a very good year in the computer Go community, with of course a warm special thank to Yizao. Of course, I will follow the future discussions on this list with pleasure. Best, Sylvain ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ _ De mooiste afbeeldingen van Jessica Simpson vind je met Live Search http://search.live.com/images/results.aspx?q=jessica%20simpsonFORM=BIRE___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
RE: [computer-go] Time Control for the new CGOS
From: Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] I am considering to change the time control when I change over officially to 5 minutes instead of 10. 5 minutes seems more than adequate for the Monte Carlo programs which play quite strongly even at 2 minutes per game. Hello all, I prefer very short time controls, like 1 or 2 minutes for 9x9 and 5 to 10 minutes for 19x19, to obtain faster testing speeds. Isn't it true that most of us will test our (MC based) programs against opponents with fast time controls to get an accurate rating fast enough? And if so, why not extending this fast rates to CGOS? Just my thoughts, maybe I am wrong about what others do. What do the other readers think of this? Edward. _ Geen zin in typen? Praten gaat makkelijker. Nu GRATIS bellen! http://get.live.com/messenger/overview ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Monte-Carlo Go Misnomer?
From: Sylvain Gelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] I truly believe that we can make big steps in this direction and getting much better (real not simulation) players that way. Hi all, Thanks for answering Sylvain. I find MoGo already very impressive, so it surprised me that you think that more big steps are possible. The number of playouts per second for MoGo is very low (maybe the lowest of all MC players?). Is this caused by the large number of calculations necessary to get a good simulation policy? Or is it possible for MoGo to get a speedup like Lukasz Lew has accieved with his library? Edward _ Geef jouw Hotmail kleur met Windows Live Mail! Stap nu over! http://imagine-windowslive.com/mail/launch/default.aspx?Locale=nl-nl ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Monte-Carlo Go Misnomer?
David Doshay wrote: But I am not sure what the value is in what you are calling light playouts. As per the above, it seems to me that light playout is simply ignoring any proper distribution, and thus is just a much more inefficient way to sample. Well maybe Sylvain is willing to answer some related questions of mine. Mogo seems to be much stronger then the rest, so I am more then curious what is more important: 1) A clever random playaout (I assume this is called a proper distribution now?) OR 2) Clever things within the UTC tree and/or above that. (Go knowlegde, selectivity etc.) And: is the answer the same for 9x9 and 19x19 boards? Thanks, Edward de Grijs _ Nieuw: Live Mail. Mis het niet en profiteer direct van de voordelen! http://imagine-windowslive.com/mail/launch/default.aspx?Locale=nl-nl ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Slow KGS computer Go Tournament idea
Ah. Orego will have the ponder feature soon. I am busy to include pondering for FirstGo. Should be ready within a few days. Edward. On Dec 20, 2006, at 3:11 PM, Don Dailey wrote: ponder means to use the opponents time to think - Don On Wed, 2006-12-20 at 23:56 +0100, Ephrim Khong wrote: hi, steve uurtamo wrote: this might be a counterproductive idea, but does anyone who mc's also ponder? a quick question from a non-nativ english speaker: what does ponder mean here? thanks eph ___ 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/ _ Windows Live Mail: Kies je eigen kleur, indeling en contacten! http://imagine-windowslive.com/mail/launch/default.aspx?Locale=nl-nl ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
RE: [computer-go] 19x19 CGOS?
Just realize that with 30 minutes for each side, each round will be 1 hour, so for a reasonable rating (which is debatable) of 170 games this will mean that one computer has to compete one complete week continuously. I naturally will use the 19x19 server, but it will be not often that I can play so many games. (Or somebody has a spare networked computer available for me?) Edward. From: Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], computer-go computer-go@computer-go.org To: computer-go computer-go@computer-go.org Subject: RE: [computer-go] 19x19 CGOS? Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 08:20:12 -0500 We have a few proposals. My preference is 13x13 at 20 minutes per game, but I think the idea of having 19x19 is more popular. If we do 19x19 I don't think the monte carlo programs would have much of a chance with current hardware if we use a fast time control.Of course personally I'm trying to encourage the development of new techniques and idea and particularly Monte Carlo although all programs are welcome. So I'm leaning towards 30 minute games at 19x19 but I'm still listening to feedback. - Don _ Geef jouw Hotmail kleur met Windows Live Mail! Stap nu over! http://imagine-windowslive.com/mail/launch/default.aspx?Locale=nl-nl ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
RE: [computer-go] 19x19 CGOS?
From: David Fotland [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'd like to see 30 minutes per side, since that's pretty typical for human games. I'd like to see 10 minutes per side, obtaining an accurate rating more quickly, although I realize that shorter times are less suited for MC based programs. Is it an option to introduce handicap stones to get a rating just like humans? Edward _ Windows Live Mail: Kies je eigen kleur, indeling en contacten! http://imagine-windowslive.com/mail/launch/default.aspx?Locale=nl-nl ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
