, at 3:17 PM, Gunnar Farnebäck <gun...@lysator.liu.se
<mailto:gun...@lysator.liu.se>> wrote:
On 08/06/2017 04:39 PM, Vincent Richard wrote:
No, simply because there are way to many possibilities in the game,
roughly (19x19)!
Can we lay this particular number to rest? Not that &qu
On 08/06/2017 04:39 PM, Vincent Richard wrote:
No, simply because there are way to many possibilities in the game,
roughly (19x19)!
Can we lay this particular number to rest? Not that "possibilities in
the game" is very well defined (what does it even mean?) but the number
of permutations of
Petr Baudis wrote:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
A - - O - - - - - -
B X X X O X - - - -
C O O X O X X - - -
D O - O X X - X X -
E - O O O X X O X X
F - X O - X O O O X
G - X O - X O O - O
H O X O - X X O O -
J - - - O X - X O -
O to play
I don't see how J3 works, black still can win the ko,
Ingo Althöfer wrote:
Alain Baeckeroot wrote:
gnugo --mirror will try to play mirror go :)
How does it do this?
In the simplest possible way. If there is a legal move obtaining mirror
symmetry it will play it, otherwise revert to normal move generation. It
does not worry about komi, nor
Isaac Deutsch wrote:
I'm about to implement this. Since I have multiple features
(patterns, is in atari, is adjacent to last play, etc.), the weight
is the product of the weight of all matching features.
I'm thinking about having a table of weights, storing the sum of
each row and the total
Joshua Shriver wrote:
Perhaps I'm mistaken in my reading, but isn't Mogo a clusterized and
highly tuned version of gnugo? Things like that made me want to make
this post. As I find the Go programming community more open to sharing
ideas and code than my chess world counter part.
You are
Łukasz Lew wrote:
...
For a reference you can take a look for a libego implementation:
Ah, so you already use this idea in libego?
libego uses this idea only for list of stones in chain.
list of liberties are not implemented.
but I guess I will implement it sometime soon.
You can find
Łukasz Lew wrote:
2009/4/8 Gunnar Farnebäck gun...@lysator.liu.se:
Łukasz Lew wrote:
...
For a reference you can take a look for a libego implementation:
Ah, so you already use this idea in libego?
libego uses this idea only for list of stones in chain.
list of liberties
Dave Dyer wrote:
If you look at GnuGo or some other available program, I'm pretty sure
you'll find a line of code where the evaluator is called, and you could
replace it, but you'll find it's connected to a pile of spaghetti.
That would have to be some other available program. GNU Go doesn't
Mark Boon wrote:
I don't know if that's what you're already looking at, but recently
Apple announced their new version of OS X called 'Snow Leopard' which
supposedly focuses mostly on improvements in the use of multiple
processing. And that includes the GPU. The module that binds it all
Mark Boon wrote:
Yes, I asked that question.
So GnuGo already uses a comment-node to store the information in the SGF
tree. But twogtp uses information from the .tst file. So why the
difference?
No, GNU Go does not put the tests in the sgf files. We did so for a
short while long ago, but it
Don Dailey wrote:
On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 07:43 +0100, Heikki Levanto wrote:
My personal preference might be C, but at
work I have to learn more Java... Anyway, I don't want to start a
language
war here, not again...
Oh, you want a war :-)
Seriously, Java has it's place but if you really
David Doshay wrote:
One nasty form of The Enemy's Key Point Is My Own was the reverse
monkey jump, where SlugGo would properly recognize that the opponent's
best move against it was a monkey jump, and properly see that stopping
that monkey jump was the best move, but it would then play the
Mark Boon wrote:
I'm getting close to something I'd like to show people and get feedback.
One thing to decide is how to make it public. Previously I used
dev.java.net to host my project. But I stopped using it because I had a
very slow internet connection and I was getting annoyed with the
gogui-display does exactly what you want.
/Gunnar
Ross Werner wrote:
Hi all,
I'm looking for a very simple GUI GTP engine--not a controller. Programs
like Jago or GoGUI are great GTP controllers--they can connect to a GTP
engine like GnuGo and play against it just fine. What I'm looking for
Claus Reinke wrote:
Just out of curiosity, what did you expect from the playouts?
Nothing in particular, really; at this point I'm just trying to
build up an intuition about what I can or cannot expect from them.
At first, I thought light playouts would not fully explore, but at
least
Darren Cook wrote:
What do your program's playouts think when presented with the board
position in the article? This is a terminal position, both players have
passed, a comfortable white win, yet pure random playouts think black
will win more often.
Claus Reinke wrote:
Second, having now looked at some more random light playouts
(just instrument your engine to output sgf before starting the next run),
I feel that the name is highly misleading. These simulation runs have
very little in common with actual play, eg, in a 19x19 run from an
Don Dailey wrote:
On Wed, 2008-10-08 at 15:18 +0200, Erik van der Werf wrote:
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
At http://trac.gnugo.org/6x6.sgf you can find an ongoing analysis of
6x6. This is a very big and quite raw sgf file where each node has a
comment block looking like this:
0
-2.5: 0 4 black
-0.5: 5 9 black
1.5: 9 10 black
3.5: 9 34 white
5.5: 38 20 white
7.5: 22 7 white
9.5:
A couple of hours.
/Gunnar
Michael Williams wrote:
Very cool. How long has this been going on?
Gunnar Farnebäck wrote:
At http://trac.gnugo.org/6x6.sgf you can find an ongoing analysis of
6x6. This is a very big and quite raw sgf file where each node has a
comment block looking like
Markus Enzenberger 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?
Uh, whatever I happened to remember to set it to. :-)
In this case that would be area scoring, no suicide, simple
terry mcintyre wrote:
On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 18:07 +0200, Rémi Coulom wrote:
When the playouts evaluate a critical semeai the wrong way, then no
supercomputer can help, even at long time control. Semeais require a
better algorithm, because no computing power can search them out with
a
tree,
Nick Wedd wrote:
My report is at http://www.weddslist.com/kgs/past/41/index.html
In the round 10 game between AyaMC and CrazyStone, the marked H8 move
has no effect on life and death; the white stones are already dead.
The killing move was 27 at E9. As far as I can tell white couldn't
afford to
Nick Wedd wrote:
My report is at http://www.weddslist.com/kgs/past/41/index.html
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Nick Wedd wrote:
My report is at http://www.weddslist.com/kgs/past/41/index.html
[Please ignore the previous empty mail.]
In round 9, MonteGNU appeared to misread a ladder in its game
against CrazyStone. SGF. But maybe it knew it had no way to win.
Yes, it was the usual Monte Carlo nonsense
Rémi Coulom wrote:
Don Dailey wrote:
I was curious about that too, who is rz-74? The name is perhaps a
clue. Is it at version 74?I haven't been watching the games, but
are you saying it behaves like a Monte Carlo program?
- Don
After watching more games, I am less impressed by
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 result is obvious.
Actually there's one point left to gain in the seki, since the game is
played with Chinese rules.
Don Dailey wrote:
Hi Markus,
Run gnugo 3.7.10 using these exact options:
./gnugo --mode gtp --score aftermath --capture-all-dead --chinese-rules
--min-level 10 --max-level 10 --positional-superko
This should work fine but you might as well remove --score aftermath.
It has no effect at all
Thomas Lavergne wrote:
Hi,
I will have very few free time until end of this year to work on my go
program, so I have decided to cleanup the code and release it in free
software sooner that what I've wanted.
So after some work I'e obtained a version of goober with light
Monte-Carlo, hash-tree
Peter Drake wrote:
On Aug 1, 2008, at 8:08 AM, Mark Boon wrote:
The neighbours of the last move come in the picture because usually
it's only the last stone played that can be escaping a ladder and it's
the neighbours of the last move that could have been put into atari.
Nothing to do with
Norbert Gábor Papp wrote:
Thanks for your reply! I've tried to make the links workable...
Hi!
Here is a situation, from phase1-phase5 (I hope you'll se the pictures).
Phase1
http://kepfeltoltes.hu/view/080529/phase1_www.kepfeltoltes.hu_.jpg
Phase2
I wrote:
Hideki Kato wrote:
Gunnar Farnebäck: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hideki Kato wrote:
I didn't against you, Álvaro, rather I just made a caution for
programmers who will use your pseudo code as is. :)
First, I prefer SFMT (SIMD-oriented Fast Mersenne Twister) rather
than integer pseudo
Hideki Kato wrote:
I didn't against you, Álvaro, rather I just made a caution for
programmers who will use your pseudo code as is. :)
First, I prefer SFMT (SIMD-oriented Fast Mersenne Twister) rather
than integer pseudo random number generators in practice where the
quality of play-out is
Álvaro Begué wrote:
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 8:10 PM, Weston Markham
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 7:08 PM, Gunnar Farnebäck
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And I agree, don't even think of doing this with floating point
numbers.
This is a bit tangential to computer go
Álvaro Begué wrote:
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 4:22 PM, Carter Cheng
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2) When generating random variables for the case where the values
of placing a stone on different points on the board are
different. Are there good ways to throw and determine which
point
David Fotland wrote:
So I'm curious then. With simple UCT (no rave, no priors, no progressive
widening), many people said the best constant was about 0.45. What
are the
new concepts that let you avoid the constant?
Whatever concepts are used it must indirectly be a question of
improved
David Fotland wrote:
Another alternate move. On problem 108 it seems that a2 works,
although it
looks inferior.
A2, a3, g1, h1, a4, and if white cuts at b4, black captures and white
has no
ko threats.
If white doesn’t answer at h1, black can live in the corner and white
can’t
live on
David Fotland wrote:
on problem 101, Many Faces likes A4, which I think also works, but I didn't
have time to check it thoroughly. If A4 doesn't work, then Many Faces is
back to 37.
A4 doesn't work. White plays E1 and is safe. Black G1 is answered by J3.
/Gunnar
Yamato wrote:
Thanks Gian-Carlo, Gunnar.
Current list of results.
GNU Go 3.7.12 level 0 : 24/50
GNU Go 3.7.12 level 10 : 34/50
GNU Go 3.7.12 level 15 : 37/50
GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, 1k : 30/50
GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, 10k : 31/50
GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, 100k
Yamato wrote:
Gunnar Farnebäck wrote:
143: I don't see how A3 could win the semeai. A2 and C4 look more
effective.
Typo, it was A2. C4 cannot work.
How does white defend against C4? I'm looking at B C4, W B4, B B5,
W B6, B A2 without finding a way out for white. Did I miss something?
Oh
Don Dailey wrote:
Go problems don't work for MC programs unless you can arrange them so
that finding the right move wins, and anything else loses. I found you
can modify some problems by manipulating the komi to make this true.
You can manipulate komi to turn any unfinished position into a
Yamato wrote:
Hi all.
I'd like to share my test set for MC programs.
This is a gnugo-style regression test file. To use it, you need
to implement 2 GTP commands, loadsgf and reg_genmove.
Then, run your program like this:
gnugo --mode gtp mctest.tst | awk -f regress.awk tst=mctest.tst
Yamato wrote:
Don Dailey wrote:
Go problems don't work for MC programs unless you can arrange them so
that finding the right move wins, and anything else loses. I found you
can modify some problems by manipulating the komi to make this true.
I intend to have adjusted all of them like that
Yamato wrote:
Gunnar Farnebäck wrote:
130: D2 becomes more complicated but looks good enough to win with
komi 7.5.
I don't see why D2 works. After E2, can black live?
You're right. I was busy counting how much damage white could do on
the right with various moves cutting the threatened
Mark Boon wrote:
Lately I have been putting some effort into pattern-matching. Although I
have made progress, the result was not as good as what I had hoped for
by about an order of magnitude. This makes me wonder what is currently
actually the state of the art of pattern matching in Go.
Of
Olivier Teytaud wrote:
We have removed most of the openings, because they have been generated
before we modify the behavior of mogo in front of Nakade, and the mogo
with new nakade-behavior seemingly does not like the openings generated
before the nakade-improvement. I guess a very
strong
Christoph Birk wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Gunnar Farnebäck wrote:
Interesting. If I do the same with MonteGNU's fuseki database, which
is based on online learning from own CGOS games, and cut off at 200
samples I get:
E5 8101
| C3 2950
| | G5 1798
| | | G3 1145
Florian Erhardt wrote:
Hello !
My name is Florian Erhardt, I am a bachelor student of computer sciences
and am in the process of optimizing libEGO for gpgpu. For now I
implemented the SFMT (even I can do copy and paste) on the gpu and am
now atomizing the MC to be done by the gpu. If
Don Dailey wrote:
Here is the entire tree, where I drop nodes if they have less than 500
samples. These are games between 1700+ players who are within 100 ELO
of each others rating.
E5 49.1% 19630
| C4 49.6% 5894
| | C5 49.9% 1558
| | | B5 54.7% 788
| | | |
David Fotland wrote:
Can you elaborate on what is in a node, and what you mean by expand? I
assume you have simple node, where each node represents a position and
the single move to get there. Then when you find a node with no
children and expand it, you allocate up to 81 new nodes, but
terry mcintyre wrote:
Does the KGS protocol permit one to propose a set of dead groups,
then upon discovery of a conflict, to say Ok, your proposal still
leads to my win, I'm perfectly happy to accept that result?
No, at least not in any way that the engine can influence.
/Gunnar
David Doshay wrote:
I looked up borda voting on Wikipedia. I did not know this was called
Borda voting, and it might be called a zeroth-order version of what I
am thinking. Rather than just take rank order from each, I intended to
try to include other metrics, for example, some measure of
Joshua Shriver wrote:
In addition to my previous email is there a cli based app for doing
two way gtp based head on head competitions between two engines?
The GNU Go distribution provides multiple twogtp scripts in the
interface/gtp_examples directory. These are written in Perl, Python, and
Joshua Shriver wrote:
For whatever reason my email grep'ing skills haven't spawns answers to
a previously emailed question.
In chess we have xboard/winboard. What clients do you recommend for
linux for GTP playing?
I recommend Quarry.
/Gunnar
___
Don Dailey wrote:
Never mind, I found what I want:
gnugo --mode gtp --score aftermath --capture-all-dead --chinese-rules
--min-level 8 --max-level 8 --positional-superko
Forget about --score aftermath. It does absolutely nothing when
combined with --mode gtp.
/Gunnar
Don Dailey wrote:
Thanks, will do that!
Someone once told me that level 8 is faster and plays just as well. Is
there any truth to that? I am planning to run this study at level 10.
Level 8 is certainly faster and it ought to be weaker but I can't say
anything about how much.
/Gunnar
Heikki Levanto wrote:
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 04:12:26PM -0500, Don Dailey wrote:
There is no question that there are positions where suicide or eye
filling are correct.
I know suicide can be used as a ko-threat, but are there *any* other
positions where it would be a correct move?
Yes,
Erik van der Werf wrote:
On Jan 16, 2008 10:42 PM, Heikki Levanto [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can not think of any situation where filling a one-point eye
would be a
correct move (provided that it is a real eye and not a false one).
Can anyone come with
Forrest Curo wrote:
So Scheme is one of the languages I've been considering, and in the
process I stumbled upon a list of programs it was used to write. One of
them: GIMP (Graphic Images Manipulation Program). Relevance?--Graphic
images of any detail are enormous chunks of data; doing even a
Heikki Levanto wrote:
On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 04:08:48PM -0500, Don Dailey wrote:
Would you rather be 95% confident of a win or 90% confident?There is
only 1 correct answer to that question.
Yes, if you can offer me reliable confidence numbers. We all (should)
know
that MC evaluations
Nick Wedd wrote:
Sorry, but I can't take this seriously. If your board update routine
fails, just fix it. As long as you trust the controller to send legal
moves, it's well defined how the board will look. The same board
update logic can be used for all rulesets. If you don't agree about
the
Nick Wedd wrote:
When I play Go on a Go server, I do not try to remember the board
position. I can always find out what it is by looking at the client
window on my screen.
When a bot plays on a Go server, it does remember the position. This is
something that programs are good at, so it
terry mcintyre wrote:
Some of the MonteGNU code was just released on CVS. Check out Gnugo's
development pages.
Don't expect that code to do better than 2000 on CGOS though
(mgtest2). The remaining code used by MonteGNU is still too messy.
/Gunnar
Harri Salakoski wrote:
command genmove w 30
reply=30 E3
cgos replys gameover 2007-11-27 B+Illegal do not understand syntax
The cgos server does not speak GTP. A common solution is to let the cgos
client cgosGtp.tcl translate the server protocol into GTP
Stefan Mertin wrote:
on 07.11.2007 07:35 Gunnar Farnebäck wrote:
Stefan Mertin wrote:
I am using GnuGo scoring in my tournaments.
But GnuGo 3.7.10 mostly doesn´t score seki correctly,
has this been revised for v3.7.11 ...?!
What scoring mode are you using?
/Gunnar
SORRY - I was completely
Don Dailey wrote:
Lars,
If I do anything to CGOS it would be handicap games. But I think your
suggestion is sensible for Japanese scoring.GnuGo won't score
perfectly every time, but I understand it is rarely incorrect.
Does anyone have statistics on how well GnuGo scores
Don Dailey wrote:
Who is running gnugo 10?You must using the right options. Here is
how I run it:
gnugo --mode gtp --score aftermath --capture-all-dead --chinese-rules
--positional-superko
You can skip --score aftermath, it has no effect when --mode gtp is
used. (Without --mode gtp it
Jason House wrote:
An XML alternative [1] to SGF has recently come to my attention. What
do others think of this alternative? Personally, the effect of a tag
affecting the previous tag seems kind of strange to me.
For use in GNU Go it would need to have quite compelling benefits to
become
69 matches
Mail list logo
