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 <[email protected]> or http://computer-go.org/pipermail/computer-go/2008-February/014277.html. And I reported my experiments in the following post <47c67cd2.8673%[email protected]> 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: <[email protected]>: >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 >[email protected] >http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ -- [email protected] (Kato) _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
