Nick Wedd: <[email protected]>: >In message ><[email protected]>, >Willemien <[email protected]> writes >>Go is in principle a drawing game. >>Proper komi (in my humble opinion) should result that optimal >>(perfect) play leads to a draw. >> >>That some programs cannot cope with integer komi/ draws/ jigo is a >>problem of those programs and not an unfair advantage to the programs >>who can cope with it. >> >>(a simple way to cope with it is to shift the komi 1/2 point in the >>programs advantage, (W +1/2, B -1/2) altough then the program will >>treat draws as win, and possibly forgo a real win) > >isn't it better way to shift it in the other direction, and try and >ensure a win by a sufficient margin to overcome the program's >misunderstanding of jigo? > >>Suppose soon that 2 programs arrive that play perfect on 9x9, do we >>prefer that they draw against eachother and draw or win against all >>other programs or that they win or lose depending on how lucky they >>are with the colour assignment? > >In principle you are right. But I accept that, where the bot events on >KGS are concerned, there is nothing I can do about it. I am in the >position of a particularly ineffective cat-herd. The change to using >the clean-up mechanism for KGS bots was made years ago, and I was told >that bot programmers should find it easy to implement; but there are >still bots that haven't implemented it, or have implemented it wrong. > >If I insist on running events with integer komi, I know what will >happen. Some bots, including GNU Go, already support it; some will >implement it correctly; some will implement it wrong, so that strange >things happen; some will fail to support it, and thereby lose won games >to weaker programs; some may refuse to support it, and stop playing in >the events that I organise. I prefer to leave things as they are. > >I announced earlier that I would be using integer komi of 7 for the 9x9 >KGS bot tournaments this year. I have changed my mind, I will use >half-integer komi throughout. This is not an ideal decision, it is a >pragmatic one.
Have you asked the reasons to the authors of the programs which can't handle integer komi? I guess they didn't noticed (or just forgot) your announce. GPW Cup uses integer komi for two years with no troubles. Hideki >Nick > > >>On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 11:51 AM, Nick Wedd <[email protected]> wrote: >>> This is boring - most of you will want to skip it. >>> >>> While beta-testing the improved tournament system on KGS, my task was to >>> report on the behaviour of the tournament-scheduler. But I happened to >>> notice several things the bots did. I report on these here. >>> >>> In the biggest tournament I ran, the komi was set to 7, allowing jigo. It >>> seemed that gnugo3pt7 (a pre-MC build of GNU Go, which I ran) understood >>> this, but StoneGrid and Orego12 did not. As a result, gnugo3pt7 got several >>> undeserved wins against these stronger programs. >>> I now think that using integer komi is a mistake. I do not plan to use >>> it in future events. And it will not be used in the computer events in the >>> European Go Congress this summer. >>> >>> The final test I did used 11x11 boards. When StoneGrid joined its game, it >>> immediately and repeatedly disconnected and reconnected. Indeed, it did >>> this so rapidly that I could deduce that Professor Drake lives rather close >>> to Portland, Oregon. StoneGrid had played normally in the previous tests, >>> so I guess it dislikes non-standard board sizes. >>> >>> The clean-up phase was mishandled in at least two games between StoneGrid >>> and gnugo3pt7 (rounds 3 and 7). I am fairly sure that GNU Go does clean-up >>> correctly, so I suspect that StoneGrid doesn't. >>> >>> TimeWaster (one of Aloril's delinquent bots) is somehow able to abuse the >>> clean-up system. At the end of every game, it claims that all its >>> opponent's stones are dead, and that its own stone (it never has more than >>> one on the board) is alive. Then the game enters the clean-up phase, there >>> is one pass, and the players make their claims again. This repeats >>> indefinitely. >>> My understanding is that this shouldn't be possible. Once the game has >>> entered the clean-up phase, there should be no more claims, all stones still >>> on the board when play stops for the second time should be treated as alive. >>> >>> Nick >>> -- >>> Nick Wedd [email protected] >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 -- Hideki Kato <mailto:[email protected]> _______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
