RE: [computer-go] Re: remote time measurement
What do you mean by operator at remote end? In my case, the program was running on a cluster at Microsoft in some computer data center. There was no operator at Microsoft. The cluster was operated from Beijing through a remote desktop. The operator was at the contest site. David -Original Message- From: computer-go-boun...@computer-go.org [mailto:computer-go- boun...@computer-go.org] On Behalf Of Dave Dyer Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 11:04 AM To: computer-go Subject: [computer-go] Re: remote time measurement My theory is that the organizers of tournaments with remote participants could appoint official observers, to observe the operators at the remote end of connections. Not foolproof, but simple and doesn't interfere with the conduct of the tournament. ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
RE: [computer-go] MC and Japanese rules
This is what I do in Many Faces, and score seki Japanese style at the end. David Other than that, I'd take a different approach: - play out as usual. Instead of counting stones + eyes on the board, you count eyes + prisoners + nr-opponent's passes during playout. - don't count passes outside of playout. I think this avoids having to take a security margin or require passing as soon as the opponent does (although in practice that may happen almost all the time). The seki-matter is the same. Did I overlook something? Mark ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
RE: [computer-go] Rules for remote play at the Computer Olympiad
A big multicore program cant repeat the move. Timing differences between nodes and communication delays can make it nondeterministic. For any program, keeping data from prior searches makes it hard to do a new search in isolation and get the same result. If random seeds are not kept for each move, the random search will be different. It's not unusual for some of the top few moves to be much better than others. David -Original Message- From: computer-go-boun...@computer-go.org [mailto:computer-go- boun...@computer-go.org] On Behalf Of Jacques Basaldúa Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 1:20 PM To: computer-go@computer-go.org Subject: Re: [computer-go] Rules for remote play at the Computer Olympiad About the thinking process log. Enabling debugging options can result in serious performance loss. In my system only the admin thread can do such things as tree dumps and that makes all other pawn threads idle. I don't think such preventive measures are justified. In case of doubt, it should be enough if the author can show that the program can repeat any suspectful move (even if it does not always play the same move, the played move should at least be among the best). If the program is local that should be enough. Remote programs cannot be controlled anyway. I think adding constraints to local programs makes the unfairness vs remote programs even worse. In case something has to be implemented it must be announced in advance. Questions: 1. What are the time settings for 19x19? 2. What are the days for 19x19? 3. Is hardware available from the organizers? At least, monitors and keyboards to avoid flying with non-critical and voluminous equipment. Jacques. ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] MC and Japanese rules
David Fotland a écrit : This is what I do in Many Faces, and score seki Japanese style at the end. David Other than that, I'd take a different approach: - play out as usual. Instead of counting stones + eyes on the board, you count eyes + prisoners + nr-opponent's passes during playout. - don't count passes outside of playout. I think this avoids having to take a security margin or require passing as soon as the opponent does (although in practice that may happen almost all the time). The seki-matter is the same. Did I overlook something? Mark It is difficult for me to imagine how it can work. Passing in the playouts cannot be clever enough so that it is done at the right time. If you score the playouts with Japanese rules at the end of the playout (which seems to be what you do), then you risk being one point off because maybe White could have passed first. Do you pass in the playouts before all non-eye-filling/seki moves are exhausted ? There is probably something I don't understand correctly. Rémi ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
[computer-go] Re: remote time measurement
At 12:59 AM 2/4/2009, David Fotland wrote: What do you mean by operator at remote end? In my case, the program was running on a cluster at Microsoft in some computer data center. There was no operator at Microsoft. The cluster was operated from Beijing through a remote desktop. The operator was at the contest site. In that case, the operator is watching you. The goal is to certify that the human putatively responsible for the program is behaving consistent with the competition, not unplugging cables or feeding in moves from a hidden 9 dan. It wouldn't prevent a deliberate attempt to defraud, but it would add a significant amount of complexity. ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
RE: [computer-go] MC and Japanese rules
I only pass in the playouts when the game is over. There is a possible one point adjustment depending on who passes first. -Original Message- From: computer-go-boun...@computer-go.org [mailto:computer-go- boun...@computer-go.org] On Behalf Of Rémi Coulom Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 2:05 AM To: computer-go Subject: Re: [computer-go] MC and Japanese rules David Fotland a écrit : This is what I do in Many Faces, and score seki Japanese style at the end. David Other than that, I'd take a different approach: - play out as usual. Instead of counting stones + eyes on the board, you count eyes + prisoners + nr-opponent's passes during playout. - don't count passes outside of playout. I think this avoids having to take a security margin or require passing as soon as the opponent does (although in practice that may happen almost all the time). The seki-matter is the same. Did I overlook something? Mark It is difficult for me to imagine how it can work. Passing in the playouts cannot be clever enough so that it is done at the right time. If you score the playouts with Japanese rules at the end of the playout (which seems to be what you do), then you risk being one point off because maybe White could have passed first. Do you pass in the playouts before all non-eye-filling/seki moves are exhausted ? There is probably something I don't understand correctly. Rémi ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] MC and Japanese rules
David Fotland wrote: I only pass in the playouts when the game is over. There is a possible one point adjustment depending on who passes first. So I can't see how you can avoid taking a one-point security margin with respect to komi. Who passes first in the playout is meaningless. A clever Japanese player would pass earlier. Rémi ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] time measurement
In message 669331.97002...@web39802.mail.mud.yahoo.com, terry mcintyre terrymcint...@yahoo.com writes - Original Message From: Gian-Carlo Pascutto g...@sjeng.org Heikki Levanto wrote: No amount on crypto-mumbo-jumbo will solve the problem that the server will have to trust the program, and its author. Signing can provide some little assurance that the program running today is the same as was running yesterday, but that's about all. As long as we can write our own programs, there is no way to stop us from cheating in them, intentionally or by accident. Very true. To the people that point to timeseal on the chess servers: both the binaries and the protocol itself are trivially reverse engineerable. I know of at least 2 people (not counting myself) who have done this. Because the client side is fully under your control, you can cheat all you want with this system. But you can also write a client for a non-supported platform :) The only reason why this doesn't create more problems is that the people who have the ability to do this reverse engineering usually have better things to do with their time than to cheat on chess servers. It's like copy protections: it stops some people, but it sure as hell ain't secure in any meaningful sense. Ok, it is clear that others know far more than me about timesealing, and related issues. I shall shut up and learn from their postings. So it's trustworthy enough the people accept it as a palliative for net lag, in an environment where most people can be trusted. From browsing chess-specific web sites, there are customs and procedures for dealing with cheats. In this day and age, unless you're in the boonies, only so much net lag is believable. Your country must have a better telecom infrastructure than mine. I live on the edge of Oxford, England. Until 2000, I had a lot of netlag. I played on KGS then, and recorded several pings to it in excess of 500,000 milliseconds. But that winter there was a flood which got into the local telecom conduits, and after they replaced the cables, I ceased to observe netlag. However in the most recent game I played on KGS, just last night, my opponent (near Liverpool) and I bother suffered from lag, I estimate of around ten seconds each. Nick Preserving one's reputation is a good enough incentive for most people to do the right thing. ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.0.233 / Virus Database: 270.10.17/1931 - Release Date: 01/28/09 06:37:00 -- Nick Weddn...@maproom.co.uk ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] MC and Japanese rules
Rémi Coulom wrote: Yes. The recipe is: - play as usual with Chinese rules, - take a one-point security margin with respect to komi, - pass as soon as the opponent passes. You also have to be careful to score seki the Japanese way in the playouts. This is the most difficult part. If your playouts don't understand seki, then you can just ignore seki, or take more than one point of security margin if you wish to be safe. I don't think that works even if there is no seki, because what happens if your opponent passes in a position in which there are still unsettled groups? If you blindly pass after the opponent's pass and thereby terminate the game, who will own the unsettled group under Japanese rules? Here is what Fuego does: Fuego uses Tromp-Taylor rules internally, which makes scoring of terminal positions after two passes trivial. If the value of the root node is very close to a win after half of the search resources are used (time or node limit), the search aborts early. Then a second search is started that checks if the position is still a win after the player to move plays a pass. If this is so, and the point ownership statistics show that the status of all points is decided (close to 0% or 100%) then the player passes, even if the best move of the first search was not a pass. The original idea for this was to pass as soon as a position is won and the status of all points is decided, because continuation of play in this situation offends some humans. But as a side effect, it also avoids to lose points if the game is played by Japanese rules. We haven't done anything for dealing with the different scoring of seki in Japanese rules yet. In reality, the algorithm is a bit more complicated, because there could also be neutral points and Fuego tries to detect them and play moves to fill them. In fact, under some circumstances there are three searches necessary. You can find all details in GoUctPlayer::DoEarlyPassSearch() in Fuego's source code. - Markus ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
