Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

On 10/10/2015 18:30, David Doshay wrote: I agree completely that there is no way to enforce computational limits over the internet. I am against ‘identical hardware’ tournaments because people have worked to get their programs working on the hardware they have, and some people will be on

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

I second Peter's response. On Oct 10, 2015 10:33 AM, "Peter Drake" wrote: > I'm also for no limits, if only because there's no way to enforce them. > > If there is to be a limited division, I'd like to see all programs run on > identical hardware. > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

Thanks to everyone for their interest and responses. The second and third questions are easy: I shall keep the zeroes in the "annual" table, and I shall update the crosstable after each round whenever this is convenient for me. I really don't feel qualified to contribute to question 1, the

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2015 10:31 AM To: computer-go@computer-go.org Subject: *SPAM* Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions? I agree completely that there is no way to enforce computational limits over the internet. I am against ‘identical hardware

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

I still like the idea of "1 Desktop/Notebook" for the lowspec category. And what is the point? Comparability. How are you comparing your "research results" if it is not clear, if the advantage comes from an hardware advantage or from your newly developed algorithms? If tried to improve the

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

Hi Nick, If you are to limit hardware in one tournament, I would prefer that it is not the slow tournament. The slow tournament is interesting because it pushes programs to their limits. Rémi On 10/10/2015 07:28 PM, Nick Wedd wrote: Thanks to everyone for their interest and responses. The

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

2 Cents from a non-programmer; >> 1.  Limit on processor power? From my computer chess background I can only recommend not to do such a thing. The only consequence might be slower progress in computer go in general. This would conflict with my longterm hopes: * I want to see a bot win against a

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

Hi Nick, I'd like no limit. Restriction will lose a chance of massive computer's programming. But one thread limit tournament once a year may be interesting. I like (2), and (3) is nice, but I'm already happy with your reports! Regards, Hiroshi Yamashita

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 7:21 PM, Dave Dyer wrote: > > How about handicapping the hardware based on time. Programs running > on more powerful hardware would get less time. > > I think that's a good idea. Programs could even aquire a time ranking, depending on their success in

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

Hi, just my 2 cents: 1. "Reducing computing power." Just let me quote the standings of the last 9x9 tournament. 1) 18 Cores 2) 80 Cores 3) 12 Cores 4) 288 Cores 5) 8 Cores Moreover, using the 18 cores of place number one is affordable to everyone as Remi outlined. Still, i would compete in

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Tobias Graf wrote: > 1. "Reducing computing power." Just let me quote the standings of the last > 9x9 tournament. > 1) 18 Cores > 2) 80 Cores > 3) 12 Cores > 4) 288 Cores > 5) 8 Cores Counting 'cores' is a bad idea; 'core' is mostly just a marketing

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

Tobias and all, Tobias Graf: <56164f25.8010...@gmx.de>: >Hi, >just my 2 cents: > >1. "Reducing computing power." Just let me quote the standings of the >last 9x9 tournament. >1) 18 Cores >2) 80 Cores >3) 12 Cores >4) 288 Cores >5) 8 Cores > >Moreover, using the 18 cores of place number one is

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 7:44 PM, Petr Baudis wrote: > On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 02:29:27PM +0200, Erik van der Werf wrote: >> A measure that I find reasonable is a limit on number of threads x >> clock frequency. > I'm not sure this would work well. The #playouts difference between

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 If I compare hardware specs in the KGS tournaments I usually use http://spec.org/cpu2006/results/rint2006.html (Multithread Integer operations are the ones most important for computer go programs I think) Detlef Am 08.10.2015 um 05:48 schrieb

[Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

I am thinking of making some small changes to the way I run bot tournaments on KGS. If you have ever taken part in a KGS bot tournament, I would like to hear your opinions on three things. 1. Limit on processor power? This is the main point on which I want your opinions. The other two are

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

Hi Nick, Some kind of limit on processing power would be interesting. To me it seems clear that a program like Zen benefits a lot by using more processing power than it's close competitors. A measure that I find reasonable is a limit on number of threads x clock frequency. E.g., a program

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

> > 1. I do not see a way to do this but running on same hardware (e.g. > Amazon EC2 with graphic card). Even this is unfair, as programs might > be optimized to other configurations (cluster) > > First, there is the question is fairness is even desirable. But also, as you say, it is really

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 5:02 PM, Hideki Kato wrote: > Erik, > > Erik van der Werf: >

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

I'd like to explain my idea more. The monthly tournaments (and current annual championship (FL class)) are not necessary to change. Just creating one more championship class for desktop computers (PC class). An entrant has to state so if he/she wants to belong PC class (i.e., all entrants

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

Nick & all, 1. Although introducing some limitation of cpu power is an intersting idea (actually my GPW Cup does), I think it's too early for KGS bot tournaments. How to utilize computer clusters' power for planning tasks is a common and important reseach theme now. As communication over

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

Nick & all, Another direction for the hardware. How about introducing two classes for the Annual Championship? I.e., no-limit (formula libre) class and personal computer one. My proposal for the later is very simple; one desktop (i.e., non-server) cpu and one video card. Hideki Nick Wedd:

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

Erik, Erik van der Werf:

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

I think this is a good compromise. Monthly tournaments free for everyone and maybe an yearly one segregated by hardware. Having segregated monthly tournaments would be a bit taxing on the organization and people who would submit their programs for all hardware divisions. Segregation based on

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

Erik van der Werf: : >On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 5:02 PM, Hideki Kato wrote: >> Erik, >> >> Erik van der Werf: >>

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

Although I agree on the research argument (setting no limits encourages work on massive parallel distributed architectures), I do find it a bit funny to see this argument coming from team Zen. As far as I know team Zen does not publish their research findings (or did I miss some papers?). Erik

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

I think cluster renting is a little more complex than Rémi makes it seem, because behind the few hours of tournament play will be many more hours of testing. There are also other reasons why programs may only target personal computers, for instance if they're commercial for personal use. If

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

Hi Nick, I don’t care much about having a limit on processing power. I’d be happy either way. Cloud computing platforms like Amazon EC2 allows to rent powerful servers at a low price. The machine I used for the tournament cost me 0.3$/hour or so. So the argument that only rich or academic

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

Hi Nick, I don’t care much about having a limit on processing power. I’d be happy either way. Cloud computing platforms like Amazon EC2 allows to rent powerful servers at a low price. The machine I used for the tournament cost me 0.3$/hour or so. So the argument that only rich or academic

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

How about handicapping the hardware based on time. Programs running on more powerful hardware would get less time. On the other hand, improving the software includes making use of more powerful hardware. Handicapping (or banning) powerful hardware would discourage that. On third hand,

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

I know, this is a lot of work, but what about "caegories" ? 2015-10-07 14:06 GMT-03:00 Rémi Coulom : > Hi Nick, > > I don’t care much about having a limit on processing power. I’d be happy > either way. > > Cloud computing platforms like Amazon EC2 allows to rent powerful