Hi,
On 12/22/06, Stuart A. Yeates [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/21/06, Jacques Basaldúa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Handicap play is a *different* problem.
The rules of go include rules for handicapping.
It seems to me that this implies that a complete solution for the game of go
must include
Hi Don,
On 12/22/06, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's easy to adapt monte carlo programs to have the goal of trying to
win as much space or territory as possible but many of us have studied
this as see that it seriously weakens monte carlo programs.
My (jokingly serious) point was
On 12/25/06, Jacques Basaldúa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hideki Kato wrote:
Nevertheless, I have certain experience (not with
MC) of computer go with handicap and I can tell:
Waiting for the opponent to blunder is only a good
strategy if the handicap is lower than it should.
E.g. 7 kyu difference
Hi,
On 1/12/07, Nick Apperson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
yeah, there are upper limits placed on computation rate by thermodynamics.
19x19 is way beyond those as Dave pointed out. But, even if you believe
that technology will improve and the most revolutionary change yet will come
to
Hi Matt,
On 1/25/07, Matt Gokey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But just because a rule of thumb holds for Chess doesn't mean it does
for Go. Of course I could be wrong, but I was just trying to introduce
reasonable doubt, since Don always seems so sure of himself ;-)
If I may venture trying to
Hi,
On 1/30/07, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It would be interesting if it would be possible to construct a 2
dimensional
model statistically. A 2 dimensional system would not be a perfect fit
either,
but would simply be a better approximation.So in some way a players
strength
Hi,
regarding time controls and the impossibility to please everyone, I'd
like to make a suggestion:
Let the engines specify a preferred time control and use a scheduler
that takes that into account (as a strong recommendation). For example
if there are two engines wanting to play at 10
Hi,
see below
On 5/7/07, Peter Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In the first playout, my first move is A, so then I have:
ROOT 1
A 1
Now I try move B, updating the tree to:
ROOT 2
A 1
B 1
Fine so far. Now UCT likes A better, so the next playout starts with
A, C,
Hi,
On 6/20/07, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But it's least complicated with Fischer clock because everything is
steady state, no mode shifts where suddenly things are reckoned
differently. A simple glance at the clock is all you need to know
the situation.
I'm not sure I
Hi,
I don't know about the others, but I got all the messages you sent.
regards,
Vlad
On 8/27/07, Nick Wedd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is not about Perudo, it is a test message. I want to make an
announcement that I make here every month, but I can't. I've even tried
making the whole
Hi,
On Nov 20, 2007 3:03 PM, Stuart A. Yeates [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The logical (but worrying) conclusion I draw from that paragraph is
that you would like to see a language with an intended application of
go...
Why would that be a worrying conclusion?
regards,
Vlad
Hi Don,
On Dec 10, 2007 9:08 PM, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
/snipped a lot of interesting stuff/
However MC play-outs is not horizon limited like this. It's stupid to
make it greedy because it may notice that winning the big group leads to
a loss every time and that some other
Hi,
Thank you all who answered my question. I think I understand better
what each of you talks about. I still have the feeling that at some
level different people think about different things when referring to
some notion, but it's probably just me.
On Dec 10, 2007 11:26 PM, Don Dailey [EMAIL
On Dec 11, 2007 3:34 AM, terry mcintyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But what about doing a top-level analysis of the board just before starting
playouts, offering some hints
to the more interesting moves? During the middle game, and especially during
the endgame, top-level
analysis can provide
On Dec 12, 2007 7:28 PM, terry mcintyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What I've googled so far looks a bit rudimentary - mostly based on unix fork
semantics. I'm looking for something much lighter-weight, Erlang-style,
which could support thousands of cheap concurrent threads. In Erlang, the
cost
On Dec 13, 2007 12:17 PM, Jacques Basaldúa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nick Wedd wrote:
In one of the British Championship Match games, a bit over ten years
ago, Zhang Shutai made an illegal ko move against Matthew Macfadyen, and
immediately conceded that he had lost the game.
Is the game
On Jan 6, 2008 11:00 PM, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The idea of a non one dimension rating model is interesting. If you
decide to pursue this I can give you the CGOS data in a compact format,
1 line per result.
Hi all,
I'm not sure I get the whole picture regarding multi-dimensional
On Jan 6, 2008 11:37 PM, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not sure I get the whole picture regarding multi-dimensional
ratings. How can you compare two players with a 2-dimensional rating?
You can't, so how would one use this rating? In my book, a rating's
goal is to make things
Hi!
On Jan 8, 2008 7:17 PM, terry mcintyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The www page for the Mathematical Go book refers to the Japanese word
tedomori -- which I googled; this book page is the only reference to
tedomori. No mention on senseis.xmp.net; can anyone supply a definition?
It's tedomari
Hi,
This question is for Mr Drake, but maybe others can't find the answer
in the archives either...
What is the license for orego?
I thought I would run some tests like the ones from the Move Ordering
vs Heavy Playouts: Where Should Heuristics Be Applied in Monte Carlo
Go? paper and Orego seems
Hi Don,
On Jan 30, 2008 9:02 PM, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
According to Sensei's Library, nakade is:
It refers to a situation in which a group has a single large
internal, enclosed space that can be made into two eyes by the right
move--or prevented from doing so by an
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 7:51 PM, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a serious competition you would want to throttle down the playing
strength (when playing black) so that it could win more and not just
quit (resign) out of frustration!
Why throttle the playing strength? Wouldn't
Hi
On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 12:48 PM, Jacques Basaldúa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~silver/research/publications/files/MoGoNectar.pdf
Your paper has a PDF problem concerning embedded font BXGQFO+CMR12. I
have used
different versions of Adobe Reader. I even updated one
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 02:51, Claus Reinke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, once you've got your representations (sets/bitmaps, arrays/hashtables,
etc.) implemented in libraries, the programming language itself may not
matter much any more (recursion simplifies things, but whether one
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 22:30, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I will build a web site soon and hope others participate with conforming
programs in any language or system. The format I would like is that
you zip it up and it unzips to a directory (or directory tree.)
Preferably cross
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 00:11, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would be willing for people to hosts these tests on a variety of
systems.
Sorry, I misunderstood your original announcement.
I suppose you're going to describe the whole setup once you get to
that part, so I will wait.
best
On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 21:22, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm doing a small study of the scalability of the reference bot at
various numbers of playouts.
I still need a lot more games, but in general you eventually start to
see a point of diminishing returns for each doubling. I
On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 05:17, Mark Boon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I had set myself as an arbitrary goal that it should do at least 20K
playouts. But with real liberties, AMAF and a RAVE formula I got stuck in
the 16K-17K range. According to my profiler that is mostly due to the
expensive
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 08:40, Daniel Burgos dbur...@gmail.com wrote:
I worked on this some time ago. I did not use neural networks but patterns
with feedback.
The problem with feedback is that it is difficult to know when it reaches
its final state. Usually you get oscillations and that
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 22:16, Carter Chengcarter_ch...@yahoo.com wrote:
I have been considering experimenting with Erlang as a means of prototyping
certain aspects of a computer go program and I was curious if anyone has
tried this already. How does a system like Erlang compare performance
Hi all,
If I may get out of lurking mode and try to understand the problem here...
IMHO there is another issue here that creates a difference and makes
the strategies for normal go and hahn go incomparable. I has been
touched upon by previous posters, but not spelled out.
Normal go strategy
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 11:18, Tapani Raiko pra...@cis.hut.fi wrote:
Hi,
Hahn go strategy is only relevant for a tournament (otherwise one can
simply play normal go, it doesn't matter by how many points one wins).
And thus it includes a meta-strategy involving the results in the
other games
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 11:18, Tapani Raiko pra...@cis.hut.fi wrote:
One can also play a single game for instance with money bets based on
the Hahn points, which makes Hahn go strategy relevant also for a single
game.
Just a thought: if the bet is I can beat you with X points on the
board or
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 14:20, Tapani Raiko pra...@cis.hut.fi wrote:
Vlad Dumitrescu wrote:
Just a thought: if the bet is I can beat you with X points on the
board or more, then it's exactly like trying to win a normal game
with X points komi, right?
Are there any other kind of bets?
Yes
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 15:45, Jeff Nowakowski j...@dilacero.org wrote:
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 03:06:51PM +0100, Vlad Dumitrescu wrote:
So the only difference in play is when losing, one has to keep trying
to lose as little as possible, resigning isn't an option. When ahead,
there's no reason
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 16:11, Nick Wedd n...@maproom.co.uk wrote:
Suppose my attempts to read the game tell me If I seal off my territory at
A, I will win by 5 points. If instead I invade at B, then 70% of the time I
will win by 25 points, 30% of the time I will lose by 5 points.
If I am
2009/11/24 terry mcintyre terrymcint...@yahoo.com:
Please try to explain why the hahn calculation isn't working in a
normal game so as to ensure a win. I'm talking about strong human
players.
In my view, we have
hahn: object of the game = max board score
normal: object of the game =
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 23:58, Nick Wedd n...@maproom.co.uk wrote:
Vlad Dumitrescu vladd...@gmail.com writes
Please try to explain why the hahn calculation isn't working in a
normal game so as to ensure a win. I'm talking about strong human
players.
Are you talking about omniscient players
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 12:04, Nick Wedd n...@maproom.co.uk wrote:
A program to play Hahn Go has no
reason to calculate probabilities, it should just make the biggest move it
can.
Ah, okay, now I understand your point of view. Thanks for explaining.
Making the largest move available is just
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 12:51, Alain Baeckeroot
alain.baecker...@laposte.net wrote:
Le 25/11/2009 à 12:39, Vlad Dumitrescu a écrit :
Making the largest move available is just one possible strategy to
attain the goal of ending the game with the most points scored. A more
general strategy
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 14:18, Nick Wedd n...@maproom.co.uk wrote:
If playing one move lead 10% of time to +10, and 90% to -20,
the resulting value is -17
(of course with the bot evaluation/playout)
Reducing the value to -17 is losing a lot of information. Another move
might have 20% chances
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 15:49, Alain Baeckeroot
alain.baecker...@laposte.net wrote:
If using a more generic approach,
the strategy can be parametrized and optimized (both offline and
online), hopefully resulting in a better gameplay.
I don't understand how anything could be better than the
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 00:43, Darren Cook dar...@dcook.org wrote:
When I read this it reminded me of experiments I tried before to pass
more than one piece of information up from the leaf nodes of a (min-max)
tree. E.g. a territory estimate and an influence estimate. I gave up as
it got too
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 12:06, Alain Baeckeroot
alain.baecker...@laposte.net wrote:
Maybe have a look at signal processing, using higher-orders statistics ?
mean
std-deviation = order 2 (or 1 ?)
...
win by 10 with std = 100 seems much less secure than win by 5 with std=1
but maybe this
44 matches
Mail list logo
