Re: [Computer-go] Nice graph

2016-03-25 Thread Igor Polyakov
AGA ratings (not ranks, which only go up to 7d, but ratings) go up infinitely, so some players have had above 10.0 rating. Mark Lee could have given a 7.0 three stones and still won possibly, despite them both being 7d amateur. Mark Lee also is favored against weaker professionals, too. So 10d

Re: [Computer-go] Nice graph

2016-03-25 Thread Robert Jasiek
On 26.03.2016 06:15, Robert Jasiek wrote: 9d does not exist. I mean as a real world rank. Of course, there are servers in which ranks are derived from ratings. E.g., KGS 9d can mean everything from real world 3d [sic!] to 9p. -- robert jasiek ___

Re: [Computer-go] Nice graph

2016-03-25 Thread Robert Jasiek
On 26.03.2016 01:23, Rémi Coulom wrote: http://i.imgur.com/ylQTErVl.jpg 9d does not exist. 8d is rare and may as well be translated to the very strongest 7d. EGF 7d means up to ca. 5p. Korean 7d might be stronger. EGF 6d means up to ca. 1p. Korean 6d might be stronger. Korean 5d means ca. EGF

Re: [Computer-go] Nice graph

2016-03-25 Thread Aja Huang
2016-03-26 2:48 GMT+00:00 Petr Baudis : > > The word covered by the speaker's head is "self". Bot results in > self-play are always(?) massively exaggerated. It's not uncommon to see > a 75% self-play winrate in selfplay to translate to 52% winrate against > a third-party reference

Re: [Computer-go] Nice graph

2016-03-25 Thread terry mcintyre
blockquote, div.yahoo_quoted { margin-left: 0 !important; border-left:1px #715FFA solid !important; padding-left:1ex !important; background-color:white !important; } It's never wise to generalize too much from one data point.   AlphaGo 2.0 is very very good at defeating AlphaGo 1.0.  This

Re: [Computer-go] Nice graph

2016-03-25 Thread Petr Baudis
The thread is http://www.lifein19x19.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=18=12922=201695 On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 09:16:07PM -0400, Brian Sheppard wrote: > Hmm, seems to imply a 1000-Elo edge over human 9p. But such a player would > literally never lose a game to a human. > > I take this as an

Re: [Computer-go] Nice graph

2016-03-25 Thread Dan
How did they do it ? Is there a video of the presentation somewhere ? Thanks On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 5:59 PM, David Ongaro wrote: > That would mean 3 stones if the "4 stone handicap" has the same definition > as in the paper (7.5 Komi for white and 3 extra moves for

Re: [Computer-go] Nice graph

2016-03-25 Thread Brian Sheppard
- From: Computer-go [mailto:computer-go-boun...@computer-go.org] On Behalf Of Rémi Coulom Sent: Friday, March 25, 2016 8:23 PM To: computer-go <computer-go@computer-go.org> Subject: [Computer-go] Nice graph AlphaGo improved 3-4 stones: http://i.imgur.com/ylQTErVl.jpg (Found in the Life in

Re: [Computer-go] Nice graph

2016-03-25 Thread David Ongaro
That would mean 3 stones if the "4 stone handicap" has the same definition as in the paper (7.5 Komi for white and 3 extra moves for black after the first move. Yes that implies that a traditional 4 stone handicap (without Komi for white) is in fact 3.5 Stones). > On 25 Mar 2016, at 17:23,

[Computer-go] Nice graph

2016-03-25 Thread Rémi Coulom
AlphaGo improved 3-4 stones: http://i.imgur.com/ylQTErVl.jpg (Found in the Life in 19x19 forum) Rémi ___ Computer-go mailing list Computer-go@computer-go.org http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go