Re: [SPAM] [computer-go] MoGo Zones
(Sylvain et al. 2006) describes the use of CFG-based zones in random simulations to simulate only the local position and tune the score based on few thousands of simulations of outside of the zone. It doesn't seem the idea is too practical (especially with RAVE, but there seem to be more problems), but I'm wondering if MoGo or anyone is still using it, perhaps in a modified form? Not like that in Mogo. We have some local tool for heavy playouts which use local simulations, but for the moment this version is weaker than the light playout - even with fixed number of simulations. Best regards, Olivier ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
[computer-go] Re: MoGo Zones
Hi Pasky, Petr Baudis: 20091024070008.gh6...@machine.or.cz: Hi! (Sylvain et al. 2006) describes the use of CFG-based zones in random simulations to simulate only the local position and tune the score based on few thousands of simulations of outside of the zone. It doesn't seem the idea is too practical (especially with RAVE, but there seem to be more problems), but I'm wondering if MoGo or anyone is still using it, perhaps in a modified form? When I translated that paper to Japanese almost three years ago, Sylvain answered to my question that MoGo didn't use such zones any more. FudoGo uses CFG-based move generator but zones. Hideki -- g...@nue.ci.i.u-tokyo.ac.jp (Kato) ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
[computer-go] First ever win of a computer against a pro 9P as black (game of Go, 9x9).
Dear all, For information, our Taiwanese partners(**) for a ANR grant have organized public demonstration games between MoGoTW (based on MoGo 4.86.Soissons + the TW modifications developped jointly with our Taiwanese colleagues) and C.-H. Chou 9P, top pro player winner of the LG Cup 2007. This was during a press conference at Taipei around a French-Taiwanese grant for joint research. Details: a) MoGoTW was running on 32 quad-cores(*) in Taiwan. b) There were two blitz games (15 minutes per side), won by the pro. c) There was one non-blitz game (45 minutes per side). MoGo was unlucky as it was black, but it nonetheless won the game. This game is enclosed. All games can be found on KGS (account nutngo) Remarks: a) Fuego won as white against a 9P a few months ago. Therefore computers have won both as white and black against top players :-) We now should win on a complete game like 4 out of 7 games and the job would be completly done for 9x9 Go :-) b) MoGo already won a game as black, against Catalin Taranu, but I guess the pro, at that time, had played an original opening somehow for fun (I'm not sure of that, however). c) My feeling is that blitz games are not favorable to computers... Statistics are in accordance with this I guess. Humans are stronger for short time settings. d) If I understand well, MoGo won a final semeai in the upper right part. But, nearly everybody on this mailing (except you, Sylvain, maybe, if you still read this mailing-list :-) ?) reads go games better than me, so don't trust this comment :-) e) The game was longer than most important games I've seen (59 moves). All comments welcome. Best regards Olivier (*) mogoTW was supposed to run on this 32x4 system, but other platforms were prepared in case of trouble on this cluster. I'll publish a correction if I see that the game was not played on this machine. (**) contributors include all the mogo-people, plus Mei-Hui Wang, Chang-Shing Lee, Shi-Jim Yen, and people that I only know by their nicknames (Coldmilk, TomTom...) - sorry for the people I've forgotten, names in Chinese are difficult for me :-) 20091026-1-Zhou vs. MoGoTW9X9.sgf Description: application/go-sgf ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] First ever win of a computer against a pro 9P as black (game of Go, 9x9).
How things changes. You would never hear a comment like Remark c) below concerning the old alpha-beta chess engines. Olivier Teytaud wrote: Dear all, For information, our Taiwanese partners(**) for a ANR grant have organized public demonstration games between MoGoTW (based on MoGo 4.86.Soissons + the TW modifications developped jointly with our Taiwanese colleagues) and C.-H. Chou 9P, top pro player winner of the LG Cup 2007. This was during a press conference at Taipei around a French-Taiwanese grant for joint research. Details: a) MoGoTW was running on 32 quad-cores(*) in Taiwan. b) There were two blitz games (15 minutes per side), won by the pro. c) There was one non-blitz game (45 minutes per side). MoGo was unlucky as it was black, but it nonetheless won the game. This game is enclosed. All games can be found on KGS (account nutngo) Remarks: a) Fuego won as white against a 9P a few months ago. Therefore computers have won both as white and black against top players :-) We now should win on a complete game like 4 out of 7 games and the job would be completly done for 9x9 Go :-) b) MoGo already won a game as black, against Catalin Taranu, but I guess the pro, at that time, had played an original opening somehow for fun (I'm not sure of that, however). c) My feeling is that blitz games are not favorable to computers... Statistics are in accordance with this I guess. Humans are stronger for short time settings. d) If I understand well, MoGo won a final semeai in the upper right part. But, nearly everybody on this mailing (except you, Sylvain, maybe, if you still read this mailing-list :-) ?) reads go games better than me, so don't trust this comment :-) e) The game was longer than most important games I've seen (59 moves). All comments welcome. Best regards Olivier (*) mogoTW was supposed to run on this 32x4 system, but other platforms were prepared in case of trouble on this cluster. I'll publish a correction if I see that the game was not played on this machine. (**) contributors include all the mogo-people, plus Mei-Hui Wang, Chang-Shing Lee, Shi-Jim Yen, and people that I only know by their nicknames (Coldmilk, TomTom...) - sorry for the people I've forgotten, names in Chinese are difficult for me :-) ___ 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] First ever win of a computer against a pro 9P as black (game of Go, 9x9).
Hi! On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 07:19:45PM +0100, Olivier Teytaud wrote: For information, our Taiwanese partners(**) for a ANR grant have organized public demonstration games between Thanks for the information! MoGoTW (based on MoGo 4.86.Soissons + the TW modifications developped jointly with our Taiwanese colleagues) and C.-H. Chou 9P, top pro player winner of the LG Cup 2007. Could you give us at least a general picture of improvements compared to what was last published as www.lri.fr/~teytaud/eg.pdf ? Is it just further tuning and small tweaks or are you trying out some exciting new things? ;-) c) My feeling is that blitz games are not favorable to computers... Statistics are in accordance with this I guess. Humans are stronger for short time settings. Maybe in high-level 9x9 games that's true, but as a general statement I'd dispute this, at least in watching 5k-1k-level 19x19 MCTS games on KGS I got a completely different impression; humans are much more -- Petr Pasky Baudis A lot of people have my books on their bookshelves. That's the problem, they need to read them. -- Don Knuth ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] First ever win of a computer against a pro 9P as black (game of Go, 9x9).
2009/10/26 Richard J. Lorentz lore...@csun.edu How things changes. You would never hear a comment like Remark c) below concerning the old alpha-beta chess engines. Yes, this group does not have a consensus at all on this. On the one hand we hear that MCTS has reached a dead end and there is no benefit from extra CPU power, and on the other hand we have these developers hustling around for the biggest machines they can muster in order to play matches with humans! And Olivier claims that computers benefit more from additional thinking time than humans! - Don Olivier Teytaud wrote: Dear all, For information, our Taiwanese partners(**) for a ANR grant have organized public demonstration games between MoGoTW (based on MoGo 4.86.Soissons + the TW modifications developped jointly with our Taiwanese colleagues) and C.-H. Chou 9P, top pro player winner of the LG Cup 2007. This was during a press conference at Taipei around a French-Taiwanese grant for joint research. Details: a) MoGoTW was running on 32 quad-cores(*) in Taiwan. b) There were two blitz games (15 minutes per side), won by the pro. c) There was one non-blitz game (45 minutes per side). MoGo was unlucky as it was black, but it nonetheless won the game. This game is enclosed. All games can be found on KGS (account nutngo) Remarks: a) Fuego won as white against a 9P a few months ago. Therefore computers have won both as white and black against top players :-) We now should win on a complete game like 4 out of 7 games and the job would be completly done for 9x9 Go :-) b) MoGo already won a game as black, against Catalin Taranu, but I guess the pro, at that time, had played an original opening somehow for fun (I'm not sure of that, however). c) My feeling is that blitz games are not favorable to computers... Statistics are in accordance with this I guess. Humans are stronger for short time settings. d) If I understand well, MoGo won a final semeai in the upper right part. But, nearly everybody on this mailing (except you, Sylvain, maybe, if you still read this mailing-list :-) ?) reads go games better than me, so don't trust this comment :-) e) The game was longer than most important games I've seen (59 moves). All comments welcome. Best regards Olivier (*) mogoTW was supposed to run on this 32x4 system, but other platforms were prepared in case of trouble on this cluster. I'll publish a correction if I see that the game was not played on this machine. (**) contributors include all the mogo-people, plus Mei-Hui Wang, Chang-Shing Lee, Shi-Jim Yen, and people that I only know by their nicknames (Coldmilk, TomTom...) - sorry for the people I've forgotten, names in Chinese are difficult for me :-) -- ___ computer-go mailing listcomputer...@computer-go.orghttp://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/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] First ever win of a computer against a pro 9P as black (game of Go, 9x9).
Peter, did your comment get cut off? Anyway, I agree with you on this. Humans are not stronger on short time settings. I believe that SOME humans could be better if they have a problem staying interested for a longer period of time and the longer time control upsets their rhythm or something. But I don't believe it's a general rule. I did know a chess player who was a weak expert and all he did was play speed chess all day long. In tournaments with long time controls, he still played speed chess. It was crazy, finishing his games after only having used 5 or 10 minutes. He claimed that he did not need longer to think because he was always sure the move he played was the best. Of course this is completely ridiculous since he was hundreds of ELO below the best human players and even further from perfect play. - Don On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 3:58 PM, Petr Baudis pa...@ucw.cz wrote: Hi! On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 07:19:45PM +0100, Olivier Teytaud wrote: For information, our Taiwanese partners(**) for a ANR grant have organized public demonstration games between Thanks for the information! MoGoTW (based on MoGo 4.86.Soissons + the TW modifications developped jointly with our Taiwanese colleagues) and C.-H. Chou 9P, top pro player winner of the LG Cup 2007. Could you give us at least a general picture of improvements compared to what was last published as www.lri.fr/~teytaud/eg.pdfhttp://www.lri.fr/%7Eteytaud/eg.pdf? Is it just further tuning and small tweaks or are you trying out some exciting new things? ;-) c) My feeling is that blitz games are not favorable to computers... Statistics are in accordance with this I guess. Humans are stronger for short time settings. Maybe in high-level 9x9 games that's true, but as a general statement I'd dispute this, at least in watching 5k-1k-level 19x19 MCTS games on KGS I got a completely different impression; humans are much more -- Petr Pasky Baudis A lot of people have my books on their bookshelves. That's the problem, they need to read them. -- Don Knuth ___ 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] First ever win of a computer against a pro 9P as black (game of Go, 9x9).
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 04:20:24PM -0400, Don Dailey wrote: Peter, did your comment get cut off? Oops, indeed. Prone to tactical mistakes in high time pressure is what I meant to say. Anyway, I agree with you on this. Humans are not stronger on short time settings. I believe that SOME humans could be better if they have a problem staying interested for a longer period of time and the longer time control upsets their rhythm or something. But I don't believe it's a general rule. Well, of course most humans play better with more time, the question is whether they or the computer gain more from the extra time. And I think while between, let's say 30s/move and 10min/move the curve of such advantage could be pretty straight, I think it would behave quite differently at the extreme ends. -- Petr Pasky Baudis A lot of people have my books on their bookshelves. That's the problem, they need to read them. -- Don Knuth ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
[computer-go] First ever win of a computer against a pro 9P as black (game of Go, 9x9).
Congratulations Olivier and the MoGo team! Good job! Now let us know the secrets of MoGoTW :) Did you get pro commentary on the game? Martin ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] OT: AI article I found interesting
2009/10/24 Dave Dyer dd...@real-me.net: At 10:12 AM 10/24/2009, Joshua Shriver wrote: Came across this today, and since this is also an AI oriented list thought some of you might enjoy it too. http://www.techradar.com/news/world-of-tech/future-tech/the-past-present-and-future-of-ai-643838 I won't believe it even if I see it. Google Mechanical Turk I heard about this a few months ago. My first thought was similar, seeing is believing. From what I read about it it's a system only built to play Jeopardy and specifically tailored to produce answers in this fashion. So that narrows the scope quite a bit from actual natural language understanding. And this article's author either didn't understand it or is being disingenuous. Because it was built to play Jeopardy from the start, it's not at all that its language understanding is so good they decided to let it play the game to see how well it would do. This kind of twisting of the truth just raises more doubts with me. Having said all that, if the program can do even remotely what they claim it can do it would already be a big advancement. It just so happens I'm allergic to hype. The article also mentions Jabberwacky. For my project I have looked at quite a few chat-bots, including Jabberwacky. I didn't feel it stood out from all the other main ones. And all have a very artificial feel a few sentences into a conversation. We have a custom-made chat-bot that was made by Bruce Wilcox (yes, the world is small) and I think it's on par with the most famous ones. It suffers from the same shortcomings in that it doesn't really understand what it's talking about. Humans can be fooled by them for a little bit, but it soon becomes very artificial because of a lack of understanding and lack of the most basic logic. Progress is being made. But very, very slowly. Where it says The Watson project isn't a million miles from the fictional HAL project I'm afraid that is not a million miles indeed but a billion miles. Mark ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] First ever win of a computer against a pro 9P as black (game of Go, 9x9).
2009/10/26 Don Dailey dailey@gmail.com: 2009/10/26 Richard J. Lorentz lore...@csun.edu Yes, this group does not have a consensus at all on this. On the one hand we hear that MCTS has reached a dead end and there is no benefit from extra CPU power, and on the other hand we have these developers hustling around for the biggest machines they can muster in order to play matches with humans! And Olivier claims that computers benefit more from additional thinking time than humans! Well, we had this discussion a while back on this list. I (and some others) argued that humans play fast extremely well and that more time provides a rapidly decreasing benefit. If I remember well it was you who was arguing this not being the case and that pros benefit greatly with more time. So it seems we're starting to see some support for the argument that at least in Go professional players don't benefit as much from more time than computers do at the moment. Mark ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] First ever win of a computer against a pro 9P as black (game of Go, 9x9).
Yes, you understood me right. I disagree with Olivier on this one.To me it is self-evident that humans are more scalable than computers because we have better heuristics. When that is not true it is usually because the task is trivial, not because it is hard. - Don On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 6:14 PM, Mark Boon tesujisoftw...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/10/26 Don Dailey dailey@gmail.com: 2009/10/26 Richard J. Lorentz lore...@csun.edu Yes, this group does not have a consensus at all on this. On the one hand we hear that MCTS has reached a dead end and there is no benefit from extra CPU power, and on the other hand we have these developers hustling around for the biggest machines they can muster in order to play matches with humans! And Olivier claims that computers benefit more from additional thinking time than humans! Well, we had this discussion a while back on this list. I (and some others) argued that humans play fast extremely well and that more time provides a rapidly decreasing benefit. If I remember well it was you who was arguing this not being the case and that pros benefit greatly with more time. So it seems we're starting to see some support for the argument that at least in Go professional players don't benefit as much from more time than computers do at the moment. 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] First ever win of a computer against a pro 9P as black (game of Go, 9x9).
2009/10/26 Don Dailey dailey@gmail.com: Yes, you understood me right. I disagree with Olivier on this one. To me it is self-evident that humans are more scalable than computers because we have better heuristics. When that is not true it is usually because the task is trivial, not because it is hard. Personally I rather think that what makes a human good at certain tasks is not necessarily a conscious effort, and that doesn't have to be a trivial task. So then actively thinking longer doesn't help as much because you lack the control over the thought-process. I believe very much that Go falls in that category, where Chess does not. Mark ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
RE: [computer-go] First ever win of a computer against a pro 9P as black (game of Go, 9x9).
Congratulations. Can you put it on cgos 9x9 so we can see what cgos rating it takes to beat a pro? Maybe zen can return at the same time so we can get a comparison. David From: computer-go-boun...@computer-go.org [mailto:computer-go-boun...@computer-go.org] On Behalf Of Olivier Teytaud Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 11:20 AM To: computer-go Subject: [computer-go] First ever win of a computer against a pro 9P as black (game of Go, 9x9). Dear all, For information, our Taiwanese partners(**) for a ANR grant have organized public demonstration games between MoGoTW (based on MoGo 4.86.Soissons + the TW modifications developped jointly with our Taiwanese colleagues) and C.-H. Chou 9P, top pro player winner of the LG Cup 2007. This was during a press conference at Taipei around a French-Taiwanese grant for joint research. Details: a) MoGoTW was running on 32 quad-cores(*) in Taiwan. b) There were two blitz games (15 minutes per side), won by the pro. c) There was one non-blitz game (45 minutes per side). MoGo was unlucky as it was black, but it nonetheless won the game. This game is enclosed. All games can be found on KGS (account nutngo) Remarks: a) Fuego won as white against a 9P a few months ago. Therefore computers have won both as white and black against top players :-) We now should win on a complete game like 4 out of 7 games and the job would be completly done for 9x9 Go :-) b) MoGo already won a game as black, against Catalin Taranu, but I guess the pro, at that time, had played an original opening somehow for fun (I'm not sure of that, however). c) My feeling is that blitz games are not favorable to computers... Statistics are in accordance with this I guess. Humans are stronger for short time settings. d) If I understand well, MoGo won a final semeai in the upper right part. But, nearly everybody on this mailing (except you, Sylvain, maybe, if you still read this mailing-list :-) ?) reads go games better than me, so don't trust this comment :-) e) The game was longer than most important games I've seen (59 moves). All comments welcome. Best regards Olivier (*) mogoTW was supposed to run on this 32x4 system, but other platforms were prepared in case of trouble on this cluster. I'll publish a correction if I see that the game was not played on this machine. (**) contributors include all the mogo-people, plus Mei-Hui Wang, Chang-Shing Lee, Shi-Jim Yen, and people that I only know by their nicknames (Coldmilk, TomTom...) - sorry for the people I've forgotten, names in Chinese are difficult for me :-) ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
