The edge-move veto was conditional. I think the condition was that there must be no stones nearby and I think nearby was within 2 points (cannot be touching, our touching a point that is touching.) But I'm not positive that was the correct rule.
I would be willing to use Fotland Bot's but I'm not sure he has linux versions and also I don't know if he is willing to pass them around to us. Don On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 1:04 AM, René van de Veerdonk < [email protected]> wrote: > For Pachi the data has already been posted by Jean-Loup, and for Fuego > there is also a published ceiling according to the scaling study in the > (free download) paper from Richard Segal on BlueFuego (someone sent out a > link within the last two weeks, too lazy to check who). Being limited to > Linux rules my cpu's out, otherwise I wouldn't mind donating some cores. > Also, if David is willing to donate executables to the study, I don't see > why that's not acceptable, i.e., that's as good as "free" to me. > > I am running a mini-scaling experiment on CGOS 9x9 right now using the AMAF > standard bots (as originally implemented by Don Dailey) with and without > edge-move veto's. They now have all received about 10,000 games, I should > stop it and summarize the data (this experiment also confirmed that > Elo-ratings converged to below 9 Elo sigma). Each level doubles the number > of playouts. Obviously, CGOS time settings won't allow too many doublings > before you run out of time, so there is only 6 levels for each > configuration. I did find it noteworthy that the ratings in the Bayes-Elo > list are more as expected (in that the ranking is what I would expect) as > compared to the incremental ones on the server itself. > > René > > On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 8:54 PM, David Fotland <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Maybe Pachi and Fuego? They are both free I think.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> David**** >> >> ** ** >> >> *From:* [email protected] [mailto: >> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Don Dailey >> *Sent:* Saturday, June 18, 2011 3:11 PM >> >> *To:* [email protected] >> *Subject:* Re: [Computer-go] scalability study**** >> >> ** ** >> >> ** ** >> >> Unfortunatelly again, all of my pcs are busy for my research >> >> work/experiments in this year or more (perhaps, until I'll finish my >> thesis).**** >> >> ** ** >> >> If we do a study it won't be dependent on any particular computer, it >> will be a big group effort and we should only use programs that are >> available on all the target machines. **** >> >> ** ** >> >> It will be very easy to manage if it's done via ssh to remote linux >> computers. It's also possible to set up remote ssh on windows, but I have >> no idea how to do that and don't want to get into it unless someone else is >> willing to take the lead on this. Stuff like this is always hard in >> Windows and easy on Unix. **** >> >> ** ** >> >> What are the best 2 programs that are freely available for such a study >> (that we do not have to pay for) so that we can get some people willing to >> give me an account on their machine? **** >> >> ** ** >> >> Don**** >> >> ** ** >> >> ** ** >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
