Perhaps the discussion of "dyanamic komi" started by Matthew's post. He reported his experiments changing komi in a game using MoGo in the post <20080227200718.ga5...@golux.woodcraft.me.uk> or http://computer-go.org/pipermail/computer-go/2008-February/014277.html. And I reported my experiments in the following post <47c67cd2.8673%hideki_ka...@ybb.ne.jp> or http://computer-go.org/pipermail/computer-go/2008-February/014283.html.
I believe it works well, though the number of the games in my experiments are not enough. Hideki Benjamin Teuber: <ff2755470907120507s5990c922x3df9b42b358f3...@mail.gmail.com>: >Hi, > >I would like to know what exact experiments with "virtual komi" have >been made and why thay failed. To me, this idea seems very natural, as >it encodes the confidence of the stronger player that the weaker one >will eventually make more mistakes on his own. You don't need to catch >up a fourty-point handicap at once and try to kill all - instead you >just overplay a little in order to catch up slowly but steadily. > >If you're behind by 5 points after move 100 against a player who is >five stones weaker than you, you can almost consider it a sure win. If >you're behind by the same amount, but when the last endgame moves are >being played, it's a safe loss. This all is encoded very naturally by >a decreasing virtual komi. > >So why exactly shouldn't it work? > >Cheers, Benjamin >_______________________________________________ >computer-go mailing list >computer-go@computer-go.org >http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ -- g...@nue.ci.i.u-tokyo.ac.jp (Kato) _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
