Heikki Levanto wrote:
I think it is better to stick to 9x9 as the beginners tournament,
where it is easy to test new ideas in quick games, and 19x19 as the
serious tournament where we can see how good computers are at playing
the game like we humans do.
I agree 100%. Other board sizes are
On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 10:46:24AM -0600, David Silver wrote:
But... in practice, I haven't got good results on larger boards. But
to be honest, I've focused much more on 9x9, so perhaps I've missed
some simple tricks.
I think there has been a marked change of interest since the
There has been much talk of a 19x19 CGOS and I have had people offer
systems to run it on. I think Dave Dyer also would let us run a 19x19
version.
David Doshay has offered some space for it too - which is what I am
leaning
towards right now.
I haven't implemented any of the handicap stuff,
There has been much talk of a 19x19 CGOS and I have had people offer
systems to run it on. I think Dave Dyer also would let us run a 19x19
version.
...
I still have this horrible fear that 9x9 would suffer if several
programs moved over to 19x19. Or perhaps BOTH would suffer from a lack
]
- Original Message
From: Heikki Levanto [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; computer-go computer-go@computer-go.org
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 12:13:43 PM
Subject: Re: [computer-go] 9x9 vs 19x19 (was: computer-go Digest)
On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 02:58:25PM -0400, Don Dailey wrote
On Mon, 2007-05-21 at 15:13 -0400, Chris Fant wrote:
There has been much talk of a 19x19 CGOS and I have had people offer
systems to run it on. I think Dave Dyer also would let us run a 19x19
version.
...
I still have this horrible fear that 9x9 would suffer if several
programs
On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 03:13:09PM -0400, Chris Fant wrote:
Why not 13x13 before 19x19?
Because the next step would be 15x15, and then 17x17, and when (if) we
get to 19x19, there are so few competitors around that the whole
tournament won't make any sense.
I think it is better to stick to 9x9
I agree 9x9 is wonderful, but a 19x19 for deep testing would be nice.
To many variations and you risk the threat of diluting the engine
pool.
-Josh
On 5/21/07, Heikki Levanto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 03:13:09PM -0400, Chris Fant wrote:
Why not 13x13 before 19x19?
You missed 11x11.
I used to test a lot with 11x11. I think it's a great size, a big
step up from 9x9 and more go-like than 9x9 but still easy to test.
But I agree with Heikki - we probably don't want too many variants.
Perhaps I set up 19x19 tomorrow on Dave Dyers server.
I'm think 20 minutes
.
Terry McIntyre
UNIX for hire
software development / systems administration / security
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message
From: Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: computer-go computer-go@computer-go.org
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 3:58:18 PM
Subject: Re: [computer-go] 9x9 vs 19x19
10 matches
Mail list logo
