20 minutes. Hideki
Don Dailey: <[email protected]>: >I can change it to 20 minutes, but let's take an informal poll first, I >would like to know that most people agree to this. > >Any comments? > >Don > > > >On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 12:27 PM, David Fotland <[email protected]>wrote: > >> I didnt notice the time limit was 30 minutes per side. The web page >> still says 20 minutes. Id also prefer 20 minutes per side, to get a few >> more games in. >> >> >> >> David >> >> >> >> *From:* [email protected] [mailto: >> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Don Dailey >> *Sent:* Saturday, October 16, 2010 6:06 AM >> >> *To:* [email protected] >> *Subject:* Re: [Computer-go] cgos 19x19 gets interesting >> >> >> >> For 19x19 CGOS is set to 1800 seconds which is 30 minutes. >> >> >> >> On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 8:50 AM, Hiroshi Yamashita <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Zen and Aya and Suzie and Crazystone are missing. >> >> >> >> Aya runs on now. >> >> I have a question. >> Is current CGOS 19x19 30 minutes per side? not 20 minutes? >> I like short time setting. >> >> Hiroshi Yamashita >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Fotland" < >> [email protected]> >> >> >> To: <[email protected]> >> >> Sent: Saturday, October 16, 2010 2:20 PM >> >> >> Subject: Re: [Computer-go] cgos 19x19 gets interesting >> >> >> Now that the tournaments are over perhaps more of the top programs can >> join? >> I have two version of Many Faces (636, from last March, and 737, the >> latest, >> both on 4 cores). >> >> Fuego is there twice, running on 56 cores and 4 cores. >> Pamogo, is it a version of mogo? >> Enos, a new very strong program. Does anyone know who it is? >> Valkyria is there. >> >> Zen and Aya and Suzie and Crazystone are missing. >> >> Regards, >> David >> >> >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of terry mcintyre >> Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 11:18 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [Computer-go] cgos 19x19 gets interesting >> >> >> >> It looks like few of the top players are active at the moment; there's a >> copy of Zen, and the next strongest program playing a game is Fuego. About >> ten strong programs have not played for some while. >> >> >> Terry McIntyre <[email protected]> >> >> Unix/Linux Systems Administration >> Taking time to do it right saves having to do it twice. >> >> >> >> >> >> _____ >> >> From: David Fotland <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Mon, October 11, 2010 12:18:53 PM >> Subject: Re: [Computer-go] cgos 19x19 gets interesting >> >> There was a study about 10 or 15 years ago that used the measured variance >> in score to extrapolate perfect play (with zero variance), and it got 4 >> stones better than the top pros. That's where this estimate comes from. >> >> David >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:computer-go- >> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Jacques Basaldúa >> Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 9:09 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: [Computer-go] cgos 19x19 gets interesting >> >> >/ And that's the optimistic view: the usual wild guess is that the best >> />/ pros are about four stones away from perfect play. >> >> Playing losing positions is tricky. The perfect move for w >> minimax wise in handicap 4 is resign. So maybe accepting >> that initially white loses by b_0 points and playing always >> a move that keeps this minimax value expecting blacks >> suboptimal choices to make b_i negative for some i is >> probably not the best strategy. It is accepting: Ok i am >> behind by (say) 45 points, lets build a solid 45 point loss. >> >> We can imagine how much a human pro can read from what >> Catailin Taranu explains from his own games in his >> eurogotv.com videos. Humans narrow the search very much >> an may foresee say 20 moves. (Anyone reads 20 moves in a >> ladder I mean 20 moves in a fight.) A perfect player could >> read 300-400 ply full width. Obviously, it could also >> compute what humans will not see or may see. Rather than >> perfect play, an aggressive overhuman 300 ply deep full >> board tesuji could probably include killing the 4 handicap >> stones for free. If perfect play means overhuman tesuji I >> guess 4 handicap stones is too few. >> >> Paradoxically, perfect evaluation can be a drawback >> and minimax wise perfect play could be non-aggressive. >> >> Of course, we can bet as high as we want because we will >> never know. >> >> Jacques. >> >> / >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Computer-go mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Computer-go mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Computer-go mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Computer-go mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Computer-go mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >> >---- inline file >_______________________________________________ >Computer-go mailing list >[email protected] >http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go -- Hideki Kato <mailto:[email protected]> _______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
