Hideki,
It was not my intention to disrespect you.I think the word you are
looking for is condescending which is when you talk down to someone as
a child.
If it came across this way I'm sorry.I tried to make it easy to
understand because it seems to me that English is not your first
For what it's worth, Hall of Fame can mean anything from the
Baseball Hall of Fame (serious business) to the Mullet Hall of Fame (a
total joke). To me this looks like a pretty clear misunderstanding.
Don and Hideki have both contributed usefully to the mailing list, and
it would be too bad if this
Thank you very much Don.
I was very surprised as I couldn't expect such kindful message.
Don Dailey: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hideki,
It was not my intention to disrespect you.I think the word you are
looking for is condescending which is when you talk down to someone as
a child.
If it came
Many Faces does on-line learning of Fuseki, Joseki, and half-board patterns.
David
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gunnar Farnebäck
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 1:28 PM
To: computer-go
Subject: Re: [computer-go] Hall
Gunnar Farnebäck wrote:
Don Dailey wrote:
Also, even though we can ask people to never change their program unless
they give it a new login name, we can't enforce that, nor is it
reasonable to try. I might have a program with an on-line learning
algorithm which improves itself over
I, first, noticed that I might have readers especially Don
misleading with my previous mail. I used we for the participants
of cgos not I and Don. I'm sorry if any.
Has Hall of fame with incorrect ratings any sense? Rather, it may
wrongly leads pepole, isn't it?
I won't discuss farther as Don
Hi Don,
Don Dailey: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I want to clarify this:
The new CGOS chart uses bayeselo to recalculate all the ratings for the
players - it does not use CGOS ratings.
Hm, now I remembered that there were not so few games wrongly ended
and scored by server's hang-up. In addition,
Many strong programs have 100% scores against many opponents and many
games. They cannot be hanging up very often.
When the server hangs, the current game you are playing is not scored.
I don't think there is a major problem here.
As far as network problems CGOS considers that part of
Why don't you mention the several versions on one login name
problem?
And, I considered CGOS is not the Nascar type commercial races but a
field to help developers to improve their progrms, say, in some
academic sense.
What is your reason to name it as 'Hall of fame'? I'm not Western
and can
Hideki Kato wrote:
Why don't you mention the several versions on one login name
problem?
I don't consider it a major problem. The theory is that a big
improvement against versions of the same program might not translate to
equivalent improvements vs other programs.I want to see that
Your sentences make me strongly believe it's too early.
I won't be against your idea. Again, just claiming it's too early.
Following your analogy to sports, there should be some gurantee of
fairness and agreement of participants.
Our presupposition was that only recent results were important.
Don't worry Hideki,
Nothing has changed on CGOS, only something has been added and it has
no affect on what is already there.
The standard current standings page also stays the same. No change I
promise.
Different versions of a program running on CGOS has never been an issue
before, and
What is the proper way to interpret the score and opponent columns?
On Dec 9, 2007 7:30 PM, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just put up the improved hall of fame page.
I'm using the values Rémi suggests and the values look more in line with
CGOS.
Also, FatMan-1 is fixed at 1800
Let me refer you to the bayeselo web site, this is not my work but due
to Rémi Coulom http://remi.coulom.free.fr/.I am simply using his
software to build the table:
http://remi.coulom.free.fr/Bayesian-Elo/
The score is simply how well the program scored against it's totally
Another example I found is the impressive Valkyria program. Version
2.7 won 92% of it's games, more than even the top rated greenpeep0.5.1.
However, the average rating of Valkyria's opponents was only 1722.
This is quite a difference. So Valkyria is rated only compared to
greenpeep
Don Dailey wrote:
Another example I found is the impressive Valkyria program. Version
2.7 won 92% of it's games, more than even the top rated greenpeep0.5.1.
However, the average rating of Valkyria's opponents was only 1722.
This is quite a difference. So Valkyria is rated only
Don Dailey wrote:
I'm not sure I used the program correctly - it's rather complicated and
I'm not that great with statistics. If anyone is interested in the
settings I used I can provide that.
Hi,
The only subtlety here, is that bayeselo is tuned for chess, and assumes
that draws are
Don Dailey wrote:
I put up a web page that displays EVERY player who has played at least
200 games on CGOS.
It uses the bayeselo program that Rémi authored.
http://cgos.boardspace.net/9x9/hof.html
I'm not sure I used the program correctly - it's rather complicated and
I'm not
To answer several emails in one:
Hideki: One question, why the rating of FatMan-1 is not 1800?
They are probably not identical - if one plays much faster than another, it
will slightly cripple
programs that think on the opponents time.That's the only explanation I can
think of.
Also, I
I just put up the improved hall of fame page.
I'm using the values Rémi suggests and the values look more in line with
CGOS.
Also, FatMan-1 is fixed at 1800 instead of FatMan and there are links to
the crosstable pages.
* http://cgos.boardspace.net/9x9/hof.html*
I'm not sure how often
I want to clarify this:
The new CGOS chart uses bayeselo to recalculate all the ratings for the
players - it does not use CGOS ratings.
I may update this list each month. I wanted to make it a top 100 list
but FatMan does not even make the top 100.
- Don
Don Dailey wrote:
I put up a
Since what date?
SlugGo played for several months on COGS and is not shown. Perhaps I
am wrong, but I would have thought that it played more than 200 games.
Maybe it was not as many as 200 games of any particular version ...
Cheers,
David
On 8, Dec 2007, at 6:45 PM, Don Dailey wrote:
I put
This only shows games played on the new server which changed over in the
middle of April 2007.
I don't plan to include those games as it would be a bit of pain to
incorporate them. As it is, I may restrict this to 1 or 2 years
depending on how long it take to process the data.I'm hoping I
Hi Don,
Thank you for giving us such an excellent Xmas present.
One question, why the rating of FatMan-1 is not 1800?
And, I'll be happier if there are links to programs on HOF so that I
can see their rating pages.
Hideki
Don Dailey: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I want to clarify this:
The new CGOS
24 matches
Mail list logo
