RE: [computer-go] simple MC reference bot and specification

[David Fotland]

If you don't have sueperko, I think you need a maximum moves stopping
criteria too.

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Dailey
> Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 6:11 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: [computer-go] simple MC reference bot and specification
> 
> On Sat, 2008-10-11 at 13:33 +0100, Claus Reinke wrote:
> > I have a rough idea of what that might be. And I suspect that keeping
> > this "de facto standard" implicit has been hiding some actual
> > differences in what different people think that standard is. Some of
> > my questions arise from trying to pin down where and why different
> > authors have different ideas of what "the"
> > standard is. If there has been some explicit standardisation since
> > those papers were published, I'd be interested in a pointer to that
> > standard and its rationale.
> 
> I'm going to publish a real simple java reference program and some docs
> to go with it and a program to "test" it for black box conformance.
> (Actually, it will test 2 or more and compare them.)   I would like to
> get someone who writes better than I do to write up the standard in
> less casual language but it goes something like this:
> 
>   1. A complete game playing program so it can also be tested in real
> games.
> 
>   2. Play uniformly random moves except to 1 pt eyes and avoiding
> simple ko.  When a move is otherwise not possible,  pass.
> 
>   3.  Playout ends after 2 consecutive pass moves (1 for each side.)
> 
>   4.  1 pt eye is an empty point surrounded by friendly stones for the
> side to move.  Additionally, we have 2 cases.  If the stone is NOT on
> any edge (where the corner is an edge) there must be no more than one
> diagonal enemy stone.If the point in question is on the edge, there
> must be NO diagonal enemy stones.
> 
>   5.  In the playouts, statistics are taken on moves played during the
> playouts.   If the move is played FIRST (during the playout) by the
> side
> to move it is one data point and the win loss record is maintained.
> 
>   6.  The move with the highest statistical win rate is the one
> selected for move in the actual game.
> 
>   7.  In the case of moves with even scores a random selection is made.
> 
>   8.  Pass move are never selected as the final move to play unless no
> other non-eye filling move is possible.
> 
>   9.  Random number generator is unspecified - your program should
> simply pass the black box test and as a further optional test your
> program should score close to 50% against other "properly implemented"
> programs.
> 
>  10.  Suicide not allowed in the playouts or in games it plays.
> 
>  11.  When selecting moves to play in the actual game (not playouts)
> superko is checked and forbidden.
> 
>  12.  If a move has NO STATS taken (which is highly unlikely unless you
> do very few playouts) it is ignored for move selection.
> 
> Did I miss anything?  I would like to get feedback and agreement on
> this.
> 
> Please note - a few GTP commands will be added in order to instrument
> any conforming programs.   Haven't figured those out yet,  but it will
> be designed so that it can report number of nodes, number of playouts,
> average score of playouts, etc.   So the tester may set up some
> position
> and a ko,  and ask for statistics based on the number of specified
> playouts.
> 
> - Don
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] komi for 9x9

[David Fotland]

Integer komi has a problem for many MCTS implementations, since a playout
only returns win or loss.  This would require playouts to also return drawn.
My playouts work this way.  I know Erik's can return draw.  I don’t know
about mogo or leela.

Davdi

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of "Ingo Althöfer"
> Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2008 10:29 PM
> To: computer-go@computer-go.org
> Subject: [computer-go] komi for 9x9
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> in other games (on other servers) games start with a
> komi-bidding procedure.
> 
> Only when both sides propose the same value for komi,
> colors are given by chance.
> 
> In my eyes, for Go it would be useful also to allow
> integral komi (7.0 for 9x9, for instance).
> 
> Ingo.
> --
> GMX Kostenlose Spiele: Einfach online spielen und Spaß haben mit Pastry
> Passion!
> http://games.entertainment.gmx.net/de/entertainment/games/free/puzzle/6
> 169196
> ___
> 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] 7.5-komi for 9x9 in Beijing

[David Fotland]

I suggest you filter all but the very strongest players, to get a more
accurate komi, from the strongest games.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Dailey
> Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2008 7:03 PM
> To: Erik van der Werf
> Cc: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] 7.5-komi for 9x9 in Beijing
> 
> 
> Let me check CGOS statistics based on relatively evenly match
> opponents and I will filter out players that are pretty weak.  Then
> I'll present the data.
> 
> CGOS is not really a democracy, but I do care about the wishes of the
> program authors.   So after I show some data,  if it's highly in favor
> of white I would like to hear from those opposed and those in favor of
> going to 6.5 komi.I am interested also in HOW opposed or HOW much
> in
> favor you are.   But let's wait for the data first.
> 
> - Don
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, 2008-10-09 at 01:09 +0200, Erik van der Werf wrote:
> > Maybe we could just do a vote?
> >
> > Erik
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2008-10-08 at 22:43 +0200, Erik van der Werf wrote:
> > >> > The only reason I would favor one over the other is if it turned
> > >> > out that in "practical play" the games ended up
> > >> closer.
> > >> > For instance if black won a 53% at 6.5 komi and white wins 51%
> at
> > >> 7.5
> > >> > komi, I would favor 7.5 because it kept the scores close.
> > >>
> > >> Last week I was told that, with 7.5 komi against itself, Mogo wins
> > >> over 60% as White. Also against my own program I have much better
> > >> chances when playing White.
> > >
> > > I really don't trust this after doing the Leela experiments.
> > >
> > > Also, I studied this a while back with CGOS data and saw a very
> tiny
> > > advantage for white, not much.  This was even when I filtered the
> > > weaker opponents out.  I suppose I could do this again but it
> > > doesn't seem to prove anything.
> > >
> > >> As programs become stronger the advantage for one side with
> > >> fractional komi will inevitably become totally unbalanced. At some
> > >> point we will approach 100% and then I rather have that go to the
> > >> first player. The only fair alternative is to use integer komi.
> > >
> > > I think we have a long time for that to happen.When that day
> comes,
> > > 9x9 will be like checkers is now,  you have to play 10 or 20 draws
> > > just to get 1 or 2 wins.
> > >
> > > - Don
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > > ___
> > > 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] Congratulations to David Fotland!

[David Fotland]

It was 4x 8-cores.

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of terry mcintyre
> Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 9:23 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Congratulations to David Fotland!
> 
> I'm curious -- was this an 8 x quad-core box? Should be able to fit all
> those puppies into a single box nowadays.
> 
>  Terry McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> 
> We must stop dressing up the slaughter of foreigners as a great
> national cause. -- Sheldon Richman
> 
> 
> 
> - Original Message 
> > From: David Doshay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: computer-go 
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2008 9:13:58 AM
> > Subject: Re: [computer-go] Congratulations to David Fotland!
> >
> > Hi David,
> >
> > Did you take those machines to China?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > David
> >
> >
> >
> > On 1, Oct 2008, at 6:14 AM, David Fotland wrote:
> >
> > > I was doing about 40 million playouts per move on 32 Xeon
> > > processors and he had eight cores.
> >
> > ___
> > 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/

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] Congratulations again to David Fotland !

[David Fotland]

1 hour each for 19x19.  30 minutes for 9x9 since each 9x9 round was two
games.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of terry mcintyre
Sent: Saturday, October 04, 2008 9:20 AM
To: computer-go
Subject: Re: [computer-go] Congratulations again to David Fotland !

Ingo, thanks for the info.

Congrats to David Fotland, also to the Mogo and Leela teams!

What were the time controls on the 19x19 games?

 - Original Message 

> From: Ingo Althöfer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> Many Faces of Go has won also the 19x19 competition
> in the "13th International Computer Games Championships",
> with a 100 % score.  The silver medal goes to MoGo (only
> loss against MFoG), Leela achieves Bronze (only two losses,
> against MFoG and MoGo).
> 
> Details, including sgf-files, under
> http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/icga/tournament.php?id=181
> 
> Congratulations again to David!


  
___
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] Congratulations again to David Fotland !

[David Fotland]

Gostar and Yogo were also classical on 19x19.  Yogo was MCTS on 9x9.  I
don't know about Break.  Gostar's author said he will now rewrite to use
MCTS.

It is very clear to me that MCTS is very well suited to computer go.  It has
some real issues though, so I think the best approach is MCTS that uses
tradition program knowledge (like Many Faces).

David

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian Osgood
Sent: Saturday, October 04, 2008 9:21 AM
To: computer-go
Subject: Re: [computer-go] Congratulations again to David Fotland !


On Oct 4, 2008, at 5:23 AM, Ingo Althöfer wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Many Faces of Go has won also the 19x19 competition
> in the "13th International Computer Games Championships",
> with a 100 % score.  The silver medal goes to MoGo (only
> loss against MFoG), Leela achieves Bronze (only two losses,
> against MFoG and MoGo).
>
> Details, including sgf-files, under
> http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/icga/tournament.php?id=181
>
> Congratulations again to David!
>
> Ingo.

Congrats to all! This is another strong validation of the scalability  
of Monte Carlo search. Were there any classical programs competing  
besides Katsunari?

Before the conference closes, it would be interesting to play the  
field with GNU Go, to see where it would fall in the lineup if it had  
competed this year as a measure of recent progress.

Ian
___
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] Congratulations again to David Fotland !

[David Fotland]

Thank you.  The game against Yogo was quite frightening.  There was a semeai
which Many Faces lost.  While it was on the board, the playouts think there
is some chance to win, so the winning percentage is high.  The program gave
up many points while it thought it was ahead, and fell behind.  There was no
obvious way to catch up.  Finally it found a clever sequence to win after
Yogo made a small mistake.

David

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of "Ingo Althöfer"
Sent: Saturday, October 04, 2008 5:24 AM
To: computer-go@computer-go.org
Subject: [computer-go] Congratulations again to David Fotland !

Hello,

Many Faces of Go has won also the 19x19 competition
in the "13th International Computer Games Championships",
with a 100 % score.  The silver medal goes to MoGo (only
loss against MFoG), Leela achieves Bronze (only two losses,
against MFoG and MoGo).

Details, including sgf-files, under
http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/icga/tournament.php?id=181

Congratulations again to David!

Ingo.
-- 
GMX startet ShortView.de. Hier findest Du Leute mit Deinen Interessen!
Jetzt dabei sein:
http://www.shortview.de/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
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] On ranks 2 and 3 of 9x9 in Beijing

[David Fotland]

Yes.  An even score requires a seki with an odd number of neutral
(uncounted) points.  So even komi is possible, but unlikely since very few
games end with seki, unless the score is very unbalanced.

David

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Dailey
Sent: Friday, October 03, 2008 5:37 AM
To: computer-go
Subject: RE: [computer-go] On ranks 2 and 3 of 9x9 in Beijing

So are you saying that you can get even scores, but most of the games
will have odd scores? So it's possible for the correct komi to be
even if best play must result in a seki situation?

- Don


On Fri, 2008-10-03 at 05:29 -0700, David Fotland wrote:
> No.  on 9x9 without sekis, the score must be odd, 5, 7, or 9.
> 
>  
> 
> From:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Antonin 
> Lucas
> Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 12:16 PM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] On ranks 2 and 3 of 9x9 in Beijing
> 
> 
>  
> 
> On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 6:13 PM, Gian-Carlo Pascutto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd have some preference for playing the decisive game with
> komi = 6.5,
> but apparently thats not possible on KGS. I think with komi =
> 7.5 white
> is scoring very high (too high?) in the top games.
> 
> 
> Aren't 6.5 and 7.5 komi in area counting essentially equivalent, save 
> for a few seki cases ?
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Congratulations to David Fotland!

[David Fotland]

Microsoft just released Windows HPC server 2008, a server operating system
for high performance clusters.  Their MPI implementation is about 10% faster
than Linux on the huge machines with thousands of cores.

I'm working with the Microsoft HPC group.  They have been exceptionally
helpful.

David

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Boon
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 7:57 PM
To: computer-go
Subject: Re: [computer-go] Congratulations to David Fotland!

Is Microsoft now selling computers? Interesting...

Let me chime in with my congratulations to David.

Mark


On 2-okt-08, at 20:52, Darren Cook wrote:

>> investment. If we can find corporate sponsors, it should not be hard
>> to gain access to such hardware. Reading between the lines, I think
>> some Microsoft wunderkind may be backing Dave Fotland.
>
> 
> It seems Microsoft are selling such hardware and approached David  
> while
> looking for some application that could give them PR for it. (And the
> new Many Faces will be bundled with it apparently!)
>
> I was speaking to this Microsoft Go Enthusiast yesterday and there  
> is a
> chance of even more support from Microsoft for game AI in the future.
> 
>
> Darren
> ___
> 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/

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] On ranks 2 and 3 of 9x9 in Beijing

[David Fotland]

No.  on 9x9 without sekis, the score must be odd, 5, 7, or 9.

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Antonin Lucas
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 12:16 PM
To: computer-go
Subject: Re: [computer-go] On ranks 2 and 3 of 9x9 in Beijing

 

On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 6:13 PM, Gian-Carlo Pascutto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



I'd have some preference for playing the decisive game with komi = 6.5,
but apparently thats not possible on KGS. I think with komi = 7.5 white
is scoring very high (too high?) in the top games.


Aren't 6.5 and 7.5 komi in area counting essentially equivalent, save for a
few seki cases ? 

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] 7.5-komi for 9x9 in Beijing

[David Fotland]

It seems likely now that the correct komi for 9x9 is 7.0.  If so, I'd prefer
6.5 komi to 7.5, since 6.5 would have black winning most games, and most
other games have a first player advantage.  This would give 9x9 go a similar
first player advantage.

David

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of "Ingo Althöfer"
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 10:35 AM
To: computer-go@computer-go.org
Subject: [computer-go] 7.5-komi for 9x9 in Beijing

Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
> I'd have some preference for playing the decisive game 
> with komi = 6.5, but apparently thats not possible on KGS. 

But that should not be a problem, as long as the operators
do not believe in the final verdict of KGS.

> I think with komi = 7.5 white
> is scoring very high (too high?) in the top games.

I made a count for the 9x9-competition in Beijing (komi=7.5:

Looking only at games among the top 5 rankers
there are 20 games so far (including two tiebreak-games)
with 15 wins for White and 5 Wins for Black.

Looking at all games among the top 7 rankers
there are 40 games (including two tiebrak-games)
with 27 : 13 for White.

Taking all 164 games of the tournament (including two
tiebrak games) White is ahead by 93:71.

It is probably not an accident that the quota decrease
with decreasing playing strength:

15/20  >  27/40  > 93/164   or translated to decimals
0.75  >  0.675  >  0.567.

However, when B+7 is the correct value on 9x9,
komi=6.5 might lead into similar problems.

Ingo.

-- 
Pt! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört? Der kann`s mit allen:
http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger
___
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] Congratulations to David Fotland!

[David Fotland]

Currently Many Faces' strength peaks at 32 cores, and goes down with more.  On 
a single core, strength increases 50 to 80 ELO points per doubling of 
performance.  On multiple processors the rate of increase is much less.  The 
increase is very sensitive to communication latency, so a [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
type of engine is unlikely to be much stronger than a single computer or local 
cluster.

The 32 core machine I'm using has 40 Gbps Infiniband interconnect with less 
than 2 microsecond latency.

David

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Markefka
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 10:18 AM
To: computer-go
Subject: Re: [computer-go] Congratulations to David Fotland!

So, when are we going to see distributed computing? [EMAIL PROTECTED], 
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] With Go engines that scale well to 
increased 
processing capacity, imagine facilitating a few thousand PCs to do the 
computing. For good measure, [EMAIL PROTECTED] as about 800,000 nodes online as 
of now.

What's the approximate increase in playing level per increase in 
processing power? Any rough law for that?

Best regards,
Mike


Olivier Teytaud wrote:
> Mogo was allowed to use 800 cores, not more, and only for games against 
> humans.
> We have no acces to so many cores for computer-computer games (if there 
> were only three teams involved,
> we could :-) ).
> For some games Huygens was unaivalable at all, and mogo played with much 
> weaker hardware (some quad-cores,
> however, it is not so bad :-) ).
> 
> Best regards,
> Olivier
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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/

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] Congratulations to David Fotland!

[David Fotland]

I heard someone say that Yogo has a very strong 9x9 opening book prepared by
a professional.  I was lucky enough to avoid playing them.  MayFaces in 9x9
has no opening book at all other than "play the first move on 5-5".

david

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian Osgood
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 8:47 AM
To: computer-go
Subject: Re: [computer-go] Congratulations to David Fotland!

Congratulations!  Both for the gold, and for defeating Mogo.  I never  
thought I'd see the day that the Go tournaments would bring heavier  
hardware than the chess championship!

I was surprised to hear that there were now only thirteen entrants.   
Why did Prof. Chen withdraw Go Intellect? Have you heard any more  
info about why CrazyStone and other commercial authors did not  
participate this year?

Also, where is GNU Go? They volunteered to round up to an even number  
of players if required.

I would also like to hear more of the story behind Yogo. It seems to  
be the cream of the crop of the Chinese programs.

Ian

On Oct 1, 2008, at 6:14 AM, David Fotland wrote:

> Thanks.  Mogo had already finished when Many Faces and  
> Streenvreeter played
> our last game.  I had to win it to win the tournament, and it was a  
> very
> exciting game with a huge semeai.  It was complex enough I have no  
> idea
> which program made the final mistake.  For quite some time I  
> thought Many
> Faces was going to lose.  Stv was looking 45 ply PV, and I was  
> looking about
> 26 ply.  I was doing about 40 million playouts per move on 32 Xeon
> processors and he had eight cores.  The sgf is attached, since it  
> doesn’t
> seem to be on-line.
>
> The 19x19 tournament has 13 participants so it will be a round  
> robin.  Today
> Many Faces beat Mogo in 19x19, in a game where both programs made big
> mistakes.  Luckily for me, Mogo's mistake was later.  Tomorrow is a  
> day off,
> and play continues on Friday.
>
> David
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of "Ingo  
> Althöfer"
> Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 12:30 AM
> To: computer-go@computer-go.org
> Subject: [computer-go] Congratulations to David Fotland!
>
> His program Many Faces of Go has become winner
> in the 9x9-Go competition in the
> "13th International Computer Games Championship",
> held in Beijing.
>
> Rank 2 for MoGo after tiebreak against Leela.
>
> http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/icga/tournament.php?id=180
> with table and sgf of many games.
>
> Today the 19x19 competition has (or should have) started
> in Beijing.
>
> Ingo.
> -- 
> GMX Kostenlose Spiele: Einfach online spielen und Spaß haben mit  
> Pastry
> Passion!
> http://games.entertainment.gmx.net/de/entertainment/games/free/ 
> puzzle/6169196

___
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] Congratulations to David Fotland!

[David Fotland]

All of ManyFaces' games are being played on kgs, using the ManyFaces1
account if you want to watch real time or get game records.  The contest
continues tomorrow morning, china time.

David

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darren Cook
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 8:56 AM
To: computer-go
Subject: Re: [computer-go] Congratulations to David Fotland!

> Congratulations! 

Yes, well done David. I see Many Faces won even without getting the loss
to Mogo reversed.

> I was surprised to hear that there were now only thirteen entrants.  Why
> did Prof. Chen withdraw Go Intellect?

I think he was having computer trouble and the loan computer would have
been too slow to make it worthwhile on 19x19.

Darren
___
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] Congratulations to David Fotland!

[David Fotland]

The machines are in Redmond, at Microsoft.  It's 4x 8-core XEON, with 16 GB
per core and 40 Gbps Inifinband networks.  I'm going to try to use a bigger
machine tomorrow if the test results are good.

Cray just announced a "Personal Supercomputer" with 32 or 64 cores in a
small box.

David

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of terry mcintyre
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 9:23 AM
To: computer-go
Subject: Re: [computer-go] Congratulations to David Fotland!

I'm curious -- was this an 8 x quad-core box? Should be able to fit all
those puppies into a single box nowadays.

 Terry McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


We must stop dressing up the slaughter of foreigners as a great national
cause. -- Sheldon Richman



- Original Message 
> From: David Doshay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: computer-go 
> Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2008 9:13:58 AM
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Congratulations to David Fotland!
> 
> Hi David,
> 
> Did you take those machines to China?
> 
> Cheers,
> David
> 
> 
> 
> On 1, Oct 2008, at 6:14 AM, David Fotland wrote:
> 
> > I was doing about 40 million playouts per move on 32 Xeon
> > processors and he had eight cores.
> 
> ___
> 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/

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] Congratulations to David Fotland!

[David Fotland]

Thanks.  Mogo had already finished when Many Faces and Streenvreeter played
our last game.  I had to win it to win the tournament, and it was a very
exciting game with a huge semeai.  It was complex enough I have no idea
which program made the final mistake.  For quite some time I thought Many
Faces was going to lose.  Stv was looking 45 ply PV, and I was looking about
26 ply.  I was doing about 40 million playouts per move on 32 Xeon
processors and he had eight cores.  The sgf is attached, since it doesn’t
seem to be on-line.

The 19x19 tournament has 13 participants so it will be a round robin.  Today
Many Faces beat Mogo in 19x19, in a game where both programs made big
mistakes.  Luckily for me, Mogo's mistake was later.  Tomorrow is a day off,
and play continues on Friday.

David

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of "Ingo Althöfer"
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 12:30 AM
To: computer-go@computer-go.org
Subject: [computer-go] Congratulations to David Fotland!

His program Many Faces of Go has become winner
in the 9x9-Go competition in the
"13th International Computer Games Championship",
held in Beijing.

Rank 2 for MoGo after tiebreak against Leela.

http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/icga/tournament.php?id=180
with table and sgf of many games.

Today the 19x19 competition has (or should have) started
in Beijing.

Ingo.
-- 
GMX Kostenlose Spiele: Einfach online spielen und Spaß haben mit Pastry
Passion!
http://games.entertainment.gmx.net/de/entertainment/games/free/puzzle/616919
6
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/


ManyFaces1-stv-2.sgf
Description: Binary data
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] Results of recent Computer Go events

[David Fotland]

Many Faces of Go participated in the main Cotsen tournament, playing against
people, on a 2 core machine, run by volunteer Terry McIntyre.  It lost 3
times to 3 kyu, beat a 4 kyu, and beat a 5 kyu.

The Computer game Olympiad in Beijing is being played now.  9x9 results are
up after each round here:

http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/icga/tournament.php?id=180

Each round is 2 games, 30 minutes each player.  After 2 rounds Mogo, Leela,
and Many Faces are undefeated.  Mogo and Many Faces played round 3 early, on
KGS.  One game was scored by both programs as a win for Many Faces, but the
board has a seki, so the correct score is Mogo wins.  I think the monthly
KGS tournaments would give this win to Many Faces since both programs agreed
on the final score, but I don't know yet what will be the ruling here.

David

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nick Wedd
Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2008 7:27 AM
To: computer-go@computer-go.org
Subject: [computer-go] Results of recent Computer Go events

Does anyone have any information on the results of [the computer Go 
aspects of] these events?

Cotsen go tournament 2008
September 20 & 21
http://www.cotsengotournament.com/   treats it as being in the future

Jiuding Cup
September 22-26
http://219.142.86.87/English/index.asp  times out

World 9x9 Computer Go Championship
September 26 & 27
http://go.nutn.edu.tw/eng/main_eng.htm   treats it as in the future




Why do organisers of Go events held outside Europe so rarely publish the 
results?  Do they assume that no-one cares who won?  This isn't just 
computer Go, it is all Go events.

In Europe, even the smallest events, such as the "Cornish Open" with 24 
participants, produce results tables which are published promptly:  see 
http://www.britgo.org/results/2008/cornwall.html.  But the 2008 North 
American Go Congress, which must have had hundreds of participants, has 
never produced a full table of results.  I am sure a lot of people would 
be interested in a results table like this one for the 2008 European Go 
Congress: http://egc2008.eu/en/congress/scoreboard/index.php


Nick
-- 
Nick Wedd[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
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] MoGo v.s. Kim rematch

[David Fotland]

This is an interesting idea, but do you have any actual results?  If you
implement this kind of rave formula do you get a stronger program?

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason House
> Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2008 4:34 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] MoGo v.s. Kim rematch
> 
> On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 18:08 -0300, Douglas Drumond wrote:
> > > Attached is a quick write up of what I was talking about with some
> math.
> > >
> > > PS: Any tips on cleanup and making it a mini publication would be
> appreciated.  I've never published a paper before.  Would this be too
> small?
> >
> >
> > Better add an abstract, but what I missed most was bibliography.
> 
> Ask and you shall receive :)
> Actually, I spent most of my free time learning Tex/Lyx, so there are
> very few changes in this version.  I'm out of time for a while, so I
> figured I'd just share what I have so far.
> 
> 
> >
> >
> > []'s
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Douglas Drumond
> > -
> > Computer Engineering
> > FEEC/IC - Unicamp
> > ___
> > 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] MoGo v.s. Kim rematch

[David Fotland]

AMAF certainly helps to do move ordering when there is little other
information.  With good prior heuristics or enough actual playouts, it
should not be weighted very highly.  AMAF finds good moves, but it often
bias heavily for or against moves.  In ManyFaces, AMAF (actually RAVE) is
worth between 5% and 10% wins against gnugo.

I've seen similar ladder problems, and it is not AMAF, it's caused by the
playouts, when they can't read ladders.  It's easy to add various hacks to
prevent playing out simple ladders, but the one in this game had an extra
liberty (if I remember correctly).  A general solution is a little tricky.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Dailey
> Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 6:23 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] MoGo v.s. Kim rematch
> 
> I think AMAF is a feature not a bug.   It's only a matter of how
> judiciously it's applied.
> 
> Also, almost any evaluation feature in a game playing program is a bug
> - meaning it is an imperfect approximation of what you really want.
> 
> Of course it could turn out that AMAF got them in trouble in this game.
> The Mogo team will probably analyze the reason for the problem.But
> as long as they are playing strong professional players they are going
> to have something to debug and analyze!
> 
> - Don
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 06:06 -0700, terry mcintyre wrote:
> > Consider this as tentative, since I heard it about 3rd-hand, but I
> believe the number of processors used to have been 3000.
> >
> >
> > Congratulations to the Mogo team; good luck improving your program to
> deal with the ladder and life-and-death issues.
> >
> > Looking forward to further information!
> >
> > I have always wondered if AMAF is a feature or a bug. There are many
> situations where the order of moves is crucial; A before B wins, B
> before A loses; ladders are a classic example where the ordering of
> moves is utterly important. AMAF seems to assume that order doesn't
> matter. Of course, there are many other positions where this assumption
> is true; that is why it sometimes yields an improvement in processing
> speed, but it seems risky.
> >
> > Ladders are also a classic case where two patterns can look very
> similar, but be very different. When you capture a ladder, you are in a
> very good position. But if the stones under attack have just one extra
> liberty, the position may "look like" a ladder, but your target will
> escape, and your stones will be full of cutting points; the proper
> evaluation for that position would be much harsher. More generally,
> whenever I see a Monte Carlo program lose, it is usually a semeai where
> being one liberty behind or one ahead makes all the difference. We call
> these "capturing races" in English for a reason; being ahead or behind
> by one liberty matters a great deal. To make life interesting, there
> are "loose ladder" constructs where an extra liberty does not help the
> fleeing stones; they still get corraled and captured.
> >
> > These corner cases are tough, but many games hinge on correctly
> reading out the exact consequences of life-and-death struggles.
> >
> > Terry McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >
> > "Go is very hard. The more I learn about it, the less I know." -Jie
> > Li, 9 dan
> >
> > > On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 13:59 +0200, Magnus Persson wrote:
> > > > Quoting Mark Boon :
> > > >
> > > > > Playing out that fake ladder in the first game meant an instant
> loss.
> > > > > Surprising. And embarassing. Any information on the number of
> > > > > processors used?
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > 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] MFG 12 and Cotsen Tournament

[David Fotland]

Thanks Terry.  Let people know what hardware you were running on.  This
version is a little weaker than the ManyFaces on KGS that has a strong 3 Kyu
KGS rating.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of terry mcintyre
> Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 6:43 AM
> To: computer go
> Subject: [computer-go] MFG 12 and Cotsen Tournament
> 
> David Fotland graciously permitted me to enter a development version of
> Many Faces of Go in the Cotsen Tournament.
> 
> It played five games, losing the first three to 3 kyu players, and
> winning the last two against 4 and 5 kyu players.
> 
> I also played a 9x9 game, where I was able to create a seki, robbing
> MFG of a few points of territory, thereby defeating it.
> 
> This 9x9 game is attached. I'd be interested to see programs which
> correctly handle such situations.
> 
> 
> David, many thanks! I am looking forward to the new improved version of
> MFG, and hope these games help.
> 
> Terry McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> 
> "Go is very hard. The more I learn about it, the less I know." -Jie Li,
> 9 dan
> 
> 
> 
> 

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] Re: Disputes under Japanese rules

[David Fotland]

Good players don't grab at everything.  That's a losing strategy.  Once one
player is ahead, the player ahead plays safely to secure a high confidence
win, and the player behind creates complications to try for an upset.  The
proverb says "when you are ahead, don't pick fights".

David

> 
> But I am told that good players don't think like that,  they just grab
> at everything.
> 
> - Don
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 10:06 -0700, David Fotland wrote:
> > I was speaking of how people count, not computers.  Chinese players
> > count by taking all the stones off the board and putting them in
> piles of ten.
> >
> > I've done (and seen) point by point counting on a real board, and it
> > is really hard to get a correct result.  You have to count at least
> > twice to verify, and usually 3 or 4 times to get two counts that are
> > the same.  So no one does it this way.
> >
> > Clearly Chinese counting is easier for computers, but Japanese
> > counting seems easier to most people.
> >
> > David
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Jasiek
> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 9:56 AM
> > > To: computer-go
> > > Subject: Re: [computer-go] Re: Disputes under Japanese rules
> > >
> > > David Fotland wrote:
> > >  > Japanese rules' [...] the actual counting [...] The position is
> > > preserved
> > >
> > > Japanese counting destroys the position by
> > > - removal of dead stones
> > > - filling in of (most) prisoners
> > > - rearrangements of stones
> > > - rearrangements of borders
> > > - border stone colour changes
> > >
> > > After the removal of dead stones, these counting methods do NOT
> > > destroy the position:
> > > - point by point counting
> > > - point by point half counting
> > > - some algorithmic virtual counting like flood-filling
> > >
> > > --
> > > robert jasiek
> > > ___
> > > 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/

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] Re: Disputes under Japanese rules

[David Fotland]

Knowing who is winning requires calculating the value of each endgame
position and understanding the best order to play into them.  Professional
players can do this 100 moves from the end of the game and typically be
within a point or 2 of the final score.

I'm AGA 3 Dan, and I'm happy if I can get a count accurate to within 5
points.  So if the game is a 1 or 2 point game all I can say is that it's
really close and I don't know who is winning.  In the middle game it is much
harder, since it's difficult to give a point count to thickness.  Often one
player is ahead on secure territory, but the other has stronger groups and
an attack.  It's very hard to estimate how many points an attack will
actually give.

David

> 
> Even though I've been assured that even good players don't really know
> who is winning in close games (which I don't entirely believe),  it
> seems to me that it should be possible to at least calculate where you
> stand by looking at the board and basing this on what you know for
> sure.
> 
> - Don
> 
> 
> On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 18:56 +0200, Robert Jasiek wrote:
> > David Fotland wrote:
> >  > Japanese rules' [...] the actual counting [...] The position is
> > preserved
> >
> > Japanese counting destroys the position by
> > - removal of dead stones
> > - filling in of (most) prisoners
> > - rearrangements of stones
> > - rearrangements of borders
> > - border stone colour changes
> >
> > After the removal of dead stones, these counting methods do NOT
> > destroy the position:
> > - point by point counting
> > - point by point half counting
> > - some algorithmic virtual counting like flood-filling
> >

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] Re: Disputes under Japanese rules

[David Fotland]

I was speaking of how people count, not computers.  Chinese players count by
taking all the stones off the board and putting them in piles of ten.

I've done (and seen) point by point counting on a real board, and it is
really hard to get a correct result.  You have to count at least twice to
verify, and usually 3 or 4 times to get two counts that are the same.  So no
one does it this way.

Clearly Chinese counting is easier for computers, but Japanese counting
seems easier to most people.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Jasiek
> Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 9:56 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Re: Disputes under Japanese rules
> 
> David Fotland wrote:
>  > Japanese rules' [...] the actual counting [...] The position is
> preserved
> 
> Japanese counting destroys the position by
> - removal of dead stones
> - filling in of (most) prisoners
> - rearrangements of stones
> - rearrangements of borders
> - border stone colour changes
> 
> After the removal of dead stones, these counting methods do NOT destroy
> the position:
> - point by point counting
> - point by point half counting
> - some algorithmic virtual counting like flood-filling
> 
> --
> robert jasiek
> ___
> 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] Re: Disputes under Japanese rules

[David Fotland]

Some comments:

First, I've seen tournament games between beginners where both agreed on the
death of a group because it was "bent 4 in the corner" when in fact the
shape was not bent-4 and the group was alive.  It's very hard for observers
not so say something when the game is scored incorrectly.

Second, one of the reasons for Japanese rules' popularity is that the actual
counting seems easier.  The position is preserved so the count can be
verified, and after prisoners are filled in there is not much to count.  In
Chinese rules you have to destroy the position and count all the stones too.

Finally, a plug for American rules:  American rules are the same as chinese
rules, but with Japanese style counting.  People familiar with Japanese
rules can use AGA rules immediately, but they have all the benefits of
Chinese rules, in that anything can be played out to the end without
changing the score.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gian-Carlo Pascutto
> Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 8:02 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Re: Disputes under Japanese rules
> 
> 
> > Disputes that beginners get into are another class of disputes that
> > these rules cannot easily resolve without the beginner feeling as if
> > they were being "handled."You pretty much have to rely on his
> good
> > nature to eventually just accept the result without questioning it.
> At
> > some point you say, "trust me, you really did lose here even though
> you
> > cannot understand why."
> 
> This is just really really bad. Not only will it annoy the hell out of
> the
> beginner in question, the problems will not only occur with beginners
> but
> every time someone starts to play the game in a matter that deviates a
> bit
> from common practise. Like, let's say, a computer.
> 
> Add in the factor that UCT bots like to play towards half point
> victories,
> and you have a recipe for pain.
> 
> > It's probably just as bad in chess.  You have the arbitrary 50 move
> draw
> > rule, castling, en-passant,  and  the insufficient material draw.
> For
> > those who may not know, there is a class of positions that cannot be
> won
> > no matter how stupid the opponent plays and these are draws and you
> have
> > to know them.   To more advanced players these are very simple to
> > understand, but to the beginner they can be confusing.
> 
> But the beginner could play out the game without complications.
> 
> The rules can be perfectly implemented and are unambiguous.
> 
> This is a huge difference to Japanese rules.
> 
> > So you actually have a situation where you can have a won game, play
> it
> > perfectly, but are forced to accept a draw anyway.
> 
> If you have an endgame that isn't winnable due to the 50 move rule, it
> isn't a won endgame. It's as simple as that. You should play towards an
> endgame that is winnable by the rules. I really don't even see the
> analogy
> here at all.
> 
> --
> GCP
> ___
> 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] Disputes under Japanese rules

[David Fotland]

If I'm playing Japanese rules I would not respond to your pass by removing
the stone.  I would pass and end the game.
If we disagree on the group status, you get to play first and make it live.
If you fail to make it live, then we now agree on the status of the group,
and we restore the position to what it was when we both passed, and score
it.

In practice this rarely comes up, and when it does, is often adjudicated by
a strong player.  

A more difficult situation is when both players pass, they disagree on the
status of a group, and the group is in fact unsettled, so whoever plays fist
wins.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Drake
> Sent: Monday, September 15, 2008 4:06 PM
> To: Computer Go
> Subject: [computer-go] Disputes under Japanese rules
> 
> I've asked this question of a couple of people and got different
> answers, so I thought I'd check here.
> 
> Suppose, under Japanese rules, I throw a (hopeless) stone into your
> territory. I keep passing until you've actually removed it (playing
> four stones inside your own territory, thus losing a net three
> points). If you try to pass as well, I stubbornly insist that the
> stone is alive, thus restarting the game.
> 
> What prevents this sort of abuse? Is this one of those cases where the
> tournament director has to adjudicate?
> 
> (This is not a problem under Chinese or AGA rules.)
> 
> Peter Drake
> http://www.lclark.edu/~drake/
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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/

[computer-go] 9x9 go Principle Variation with perfect play

[David Fotland]

At this point I think everyone would agree that E5 is the optimal first move
for black on 9x9.

Now that I have deeper and more accurate search, my engine favors E7 in
response to E5 by a large margin.  Do the other strong programs also find
that E7 is best response?

After E5 E7, there are several moves I've seen from strong engines.  My
opinion as a go player is that best next move is either E3 or D6.  My
program chooses different moves here depending on the search settings.

David


___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] 9x9 to 19x19 scaling strangeness

[David Fotland]

Actually I see that I didn’t test on 19x19 for a couple of weeks, so the
improved strength can be from any of a dozen changes I made and only tested
on 9x9.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Fotland
> Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 9:32 AM
> To: 'computer-go'
> Subject: RE: [computer-go] 9x9 to 19x19 scaling strangeness
> 
> Can you put crazystone back on 19x19 so I can see if it is just a fluke
> against fuego?
> 
> I added locality to the light playouts - play near last or second to
> last
> move, and some code to handle long ladders in playouts.  I don’t think
> this
> is anything unusual.
> 
> Both should help 19x19, but I don’t know why 9x9 would be damaged.
> 
> I also changed code around playing self atari in seki.  Perhaps there
> is
> bug, since seki is more important in 9x9.
> 
> The biggest problem that I have with monte carlo is the amount of
> testing.
> I made four or five changes and I'm testing them together now.  To see
> the
> effect of each change independently would take a couple of weeks of
> testing,
> since it takes several days on 19x19 to get an accurate rating.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> David
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rémi Coulom
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 9:20 AM
> > To: computer-go
> > Subject: Re: [computer-go] 9x9 to 19x19 scaling strangeness
> >
> > David Fotland wrote:
> > > I made a change over the weekend, which looks like it makes 9x9 150
> > ELO
> > > weaker and 19x19 over 200 ELO stronger.
> > >
> > > Very strange.
> > >
> > > David
> > >
> > > ___
> > > computer-go mailing list
> > > computer-go@computer-go.org
> > > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
> > >
> > Now you must tell us what the change was :-)
> >
> > 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/

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] 9x9 to 19x19 scaling strangeness

[David Fotland]

So I guess you have seen the same effect.  I have no size dependent code.  

 

Can you tell us some of the things that make a big difference between 19x19 and 
9x9?  Do you turn off progressive unpruning for 9x9?  Do you have a different 
balance between exploration and exploitation?

 

David

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Olivier Teytaud
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 9:24 AM
To: computer-go
Subject: Re: [computer-go] 9x9 to 19x19 scaling strangeness

 

 

 

I made a change over the weekend, which looks like it makes 9x9 150 ELO
weaker and 19x19 over 200 ELO stronger.

We have plenty of size-dependent parameters and plenty of "if (boardsize==19)" 
in MoGo for things like that :-)

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] 9x9 to 19x19 scaling strangeness

[David Fotland]

Can you put crazystone back on 19x19 so I can see if it is just a fluke
against fuego?

I added locality to the light playouts - play near last or second to last
move, and some code to handle long ladders in playouts.  I don’t think this
is anything unusual.  

Both should help 19x19, but I don’t know why 9x9 would be damaged.

I also changed code around playing self atari in seki.  Perhaps there is
bug, since seki is more important in 9x9.

The biggest problem that I have with monte carlo is the amount of testing.
I made four or five changes and I'm testing them together now.  To see the
effect of each change independently would take a couple of weeks of testing,
since it takes several days on 19x19 to get an accurate rating.

Regards,

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rémi Coulom
> Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 9:20 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] 9x9 to 19x19 scaling strangeness
> 
> David Fotland wrote:
> > I made a change over the weekend, which looks like it makes 9x9 150
> ELO
> > weaker and 19x19 over 200 ELO stronger.
> >
> > Very strange.
> >
> > David
> >
> > ___
> > computer-go mailing list
> > computer-go@computer-go.org
> > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
> >
> Now you must tell us what the change was :-)
> 
> 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/

[computer-go] 9x9 to 19x19 scaling strangeness

[David Fotland]

I made a change over the weekend, which looks like it makes 9x9 150 ELO
weaker and 19x19 over 200 ELO stronger.

Very strange.

David

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

[computer-go] cgos 9x9 is back up, but without anchors.

[David Fotland]

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

[computer-go] CGOS 9x9 seems to be stuck

[David Fotland]

It looks like it hasn't scheduled any games for the last few hours.  

David


___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

[computer-go] no interest in 13x13

[David Fotland]

It seems there is almost no interest in 13x13 cgos.  There is usually no
program there.

Does it make sense to keep it?

David

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] yet a mogo vs human game

[David Fotland]

> 
> The scary strong Rybka program claims to be weak tactically.  The
> developers say that problem solving skill does not correlate strongly
> with playing strength and they don't tune or care about that. 

I've found the same thing for go.  I have a large tactical problem set, and
I use it for regressions, but I've found that spending much time tuning to
solve problems can make the program weaker.  There is not a strong
correlation between problem solving and general go strength.

David


___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] yet a mogo vs human game

[David Fotland]

You really can't conclude much about any mogo strength improvement from just
one game.

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Waite
Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 7:54 AM
To: computer-go@computer-go.org
Subject: [computer-go] yet a mogo vs human game

 

* - MoGo was using 5% of Huygens (instead of 25% against Kim);


* - there were some software improvements


* - MoGo won 2 out of 3 games in 9x9 (even games)


* - MoGo won with handicap 5 in 19x19 against the 6D player









That is interesting... it used 1/5th of the processing power and


got approximately the same rank (about 1 Dan). From what I gather..


Kim believed it was 2 or 3 Dan? I guess this is because a 9 stone


handi starts to make the stone per rank estimation get a bit fuzzy.









It is mentioned that there was a software improvement. I wonder how


much the software improvement made up for the reduction in processing


power since it seems to have stayed approximately the same rank. Or could






it mean that dividing the computation strength by 5 did not change


the relative strength of Mogo by much?
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

[computer-go] reminder, there is another possible computer go contest in Taizhou

[David Fotland]

In late september there is a computer go contest in Taizhou, with cash
prizes.  They might cancel this contest due to lack of participation, so if
you are thinking of going, please let them know today or tomorrow.

David

From: ?? [EMAIL PROTECTED]

This email is an invitation letter from the Institute of Computer GO at
Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, we've got your email
from the submission list of 2008 Conference of Computer Games and World 9*9
Computer Go Championship.

We are happy to announce that an international computer GO championship is
to be hosted by Taizhou city government and Beijing University of Posts and
Telecommunications. As 2008 Conference of Computer Games and World World 9*9
Computer Go Championship will be held in Beijng this year, so we have time
for the game in this tournament before (September 22-26), to facilitate your
itinerary.

This event does not require registration fee, and your the board and lodging
in Taizhou will be provided freely  by the organizing committee, so you only
need to predate your China's trip one-week earlier, and the first
destination to be revised as Taizhou. If there is any problem on how to
reach Taizhou, we can provide some help. If you are willing to participate
in the tournament, only need to reply to this email, we will contact you.

2008 TaiZhou Computer Go Championship

1. The number of participating countries and regions: 20 countries and
regions, including China and the China Taipei. In accordance with the
relevant provisions of BOCOG, The participating teams and all staff from
China Taiwan use "Chinese Taipei" title.
2. The number of entries: 50
3. Competition schedule: September 22 to September 26
  a. 9/22: receiption
  b. 9/23: a round robin preliminaries way
  c. 9/24: a round robin preliminaries way
  d. 9/25: a round robin preliminaries way
  e. 9/26: Final championship matches, and man-machine matches, award
ceremonies 4. Prize competition
  19x19 Go:
  First place,  3,000 USD
  Second place, 2,000 USD
  Third place, 1,000 USD
  Fourth place, 500 USD
  Fifth place,  250 USD

  9x9 Go:
  First place, 2,000 USD.
  Second place, 1,000 USD
  Third place, 500 USD
  Fourth place, 250 USD


--
Zhiqing Liu, Ph.D.
Professor, School of Software Engineering Director, BUPT-JD Computer GO
Research Institute Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications
Voice: +86-10-6228-2601 and +86-10-5882-8089
Fax: +86-10-6228-2601 and +86-10-5882-8005
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] Re: What's happening at the European Go Congress?

[David Fotland]

> 
> I hope that David Fotland can chime in here on value of joseki
> libraries on program strength.
> 
> Also, which existing classical program is considered the best semeai
> player?
> 
> Ian

I don't know that joseki knowledge mad Many Faces stronger.  Go Intellect
always used to turn off the joseki libraries in tournaments against Many
Faces, since it had a better win rate if it avoided joseki moves.  I suppose
that's some evidence that joseki knowledge helps.  I added joseki primarily
so the program would play better openings against people.

For a long time Many Faces was the strongest tactical and semeai program.  I
had fewer patterns than other strong programs and depended more on catching
groups to win.  I'm not sure if that is still true.  Gnugo has gotten much
stronger tactically in the last few years.

David


___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] Re: What's happening at the European Go Congress?

[David Fotland]

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian Osgood
> 
> This is a different kind of opening book than I'm thinking of. You
> are both talking about cached computation, whereas I consider an
> opening book as codified theory and wisdom gained over the entire
> history of the game (semeais and joseki).  How could adding
> established semeai and joseki patterns (probably for early move
> selection and bias) to a program make it weaker?  If anything, the
> global view of full-board MCTS has the potential to make better use
> of semeai and joseki patterns than the classical shallow-search
> programs.
> 

Many Faces has a large opening book, and the UCT version uses all of Many
Faces' knowledge.  It has a full board book built from about 50K
professional and another 50K strong amateur games.  It has a joseki book
built from every move in every book of joseki published in English before
2002, and a few joseki from a huge Japanese language joseki dictionary.

For 9x9 it has a fuseki book from pro and CGOS strong program games.

I think the books help, but I didn't test it yet.

David


___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] Re: mogo beats pro!

[David Fotland]

I wrote the evaluation in the early 1980s.  Multicore and threads was far
from a consideration.  The big issue was how to fit all the core data in 400
KB and make it fast enough to run well on an x286 processor at about 20 MHz.
:(

I wrote the playout code in April.

David 

> 
> This doesn't really have anything to do with UCT. If your playouts
> would
> not be threadsafe you would have the same problem. I guess you wrote
> the
> playout code more recently than the evaluation, after you learned what
> threadsafe is and why it's good to have :-)
> 
> --
> GCP
> ___
> 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] Re: mogo beats pro!

[David Fotland]

Yes, my alpha-beta searcher still has the big slow evaluation function (about 
50 to 100 evaluations a second).

When I get some free computer time I'll put it on the 19x19 server.  I think it 
will be much closer to the 1 cpu uct many faces than to the older version 11 
many faces.

Uct also has the advantage that it is much easier to use with multiple CPUs.  I 
know parallel alpha-beta exists, but my evaluation function is not designed to 
be thread safe.  If I put a big lock around it, there will be almost no SMP 
scaling, since almost all the time is in the evaluation, not in the search.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Dailey
> Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 8:31 PM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: RE: [computer-go] Re: mogo beats pro!
> 
> On Mon, 2008-08-11 at 20:10 -0700, David Fotland wrote:
> > Sorry, but I can�t let this statement go past.  The go programs in
> the
> > 90s did local search, but not much global search.  For example Many
> > Faces did a one ply global search, with a variable depth quiescence
> > search.  I added an alpha-beta search to Many Faces last year, and it
> > made a huge improvement in strength.  So it is not true that
> > alpha-beta pruning hit a roadblock.
> >
> 
> I never doubted alpha-beta but when you say alpha-beta and GO in the
> same sentence, people automatically believe the program is going from
> 99% evaluation to 1% evaluation and 99% stupid.  In fact you are still
> spending most of your time evaluating positions.
> 
> I'm still not convinced that you can't make a strong alpha beta GO
> program if you have some imagination.  It cannot just be a converted
> chess program, it has to be different, but still alpha beta at heart.
> It would have to be extremely selective.
> 
> - Don
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >
> >
> > For me, the big advantage of UCT/MC is that it eliminates the huge,
> > slow, buggy evaluation function.  Simple playouts are much much
> easier
> > to make bug free.  Bugs in the evaluation function caused many
> losses,
> > and are almost impossible to eliminate in traditional programs, since
> > the evaluation functions are so complex.
> >
> >
> >
> > David
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > It seems that alpha/beta pruning hit a roadblock a long time ago in
> > go. Now we have MC... which as you increase the number of samples..
> > you start to get closer to an equivalent alpha/beta. But... there are
> > still huge groups of samples that are not checked... and if you want
> > to somehow prove you have the best move... how will you do it? Will
> > you make the sample size equivalent to the number of possible
> samples?
> > How will you do this practically? You can only state with a certain
> > confidence that you did make the best move and this would be bound by
> > our computational resources.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > 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/

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] Re: mogo beats pro!

[David Fotland]

Sorry, but I can't let this statement go past.  The go programs in the 90s
did local search, but not much global search.  For example Many Faces did a
one ply global search, with a variable depth quiescence search.  I added an
alpha-beta search to Many Faces last year, and it made a huge improvement in
strength.  So it is not true that alpha-beta pruning hit a roadblock.

 

For me, the big advantage of UCT/MC is that it eliminates the huge, slow,
buggy evaluation function.  Simple playouts are much much easier to make bug
free.  Bugs in the evaluation function caused many losses, and are almost
impossible to eliminate in traditional programs, since the evaluation
functions are so complex.

 

David

 

 

It seems that alpha/beta pruning hit a roadblock a long time ago in go. Now
we have MC... which as you increase the number of samples.. you start to get
closer to an equivalent alpha/beta. But... there are still huge groups of
samples that are not checked... and if you want to somehow prove you have
the best move... how will you do it? Will you make the sample size
equivalent to the number of possible samples? How will you do this
practically? You can only state with a certain confidence that you did make
the best move and this would be bound by our computational resources.




 

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] Some cgos 19x19 suggestions

[David Fotland]

Thanks.  This is more like what I would expect.  About 80 elo points between
mfgo 1 cpu and 2 cpu (like other programs), and many faces 11 a little
higher rated.

Does anyone know whose program is rz-74?  I'm trying to catch mogo,
crazystone, and leela by September, and I'm curious if there will be other
strong competition.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Dailey
> Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2008 7:02 PM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Some cgos 19x19 suggestions
> 
> Here are the current ratings using bayeselo of program on the 19x19
> server.   I have a script in place so that I can update this at will
> and
> I may run this every few  hours or so, probably starting tomorrow.
> 
>   http://cgos.boardspace.net/19x19/bayes_19x19.html
> 
> - Don
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sun, 2008-08-10 at 08:51 -0700, David Fotland wrote:
> > First, thank you very much, Don, for giving us a reliable 19x19
> server.
> >
> > Please consider increasing the time a program stays on the list until
> it
> > ages off.  I guess you drop programs from the ratings page after some
> time
> > that depends on the number of games they have played.  Since 19x19
> games
> > take 4 times longs, it seems you should allow four times as much time
> to age
> > off the list, for the same number of games.  I like seeing the top
> program's
> > results a little longer.
> >
> > It would be nice if a program can get into position more quickly.
> Since the
> > games take longer, it can take several days to climb up from the
> initial
> > 1200 to 2000, especially if there is an early loos.  Does it make
> sense to
> > set the initial k value a little higher, or to set the initial rating
> to
> > 1500 instead of 1200?
> >
> > -David
> >
> >
> > ___
> > 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/

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] Some cgos 19x19 suggestions

[David Fotland]

It's too early.  I've run mfgo11 before and it's rating settled down around
1700 I think, just a little weaker than gnugo.  So it is still rising (and
being held back by a few loses to other programs that are still rising).

In testing, the monte carlo Many Faces beats mfgo version 11 over 95%, but
only on a few dozen games.  So 400 ELO improvement might be about right.

David 

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of steve uurtamo
> Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2008 3:43 PM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Some cgos 19x19 suggestions
> 
> david, is mfgo-12-0805-2c really over 400 ELO better
> than mfgo-11, as cgos seems to suggest?  or is mfgo11
> still rising up into place?
> 
> thanks,
> 
> s.
> 
> 
> On Sun, Aug 10, 2008 at 8:51 AM, David Fotland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> games.com> wrote:
> > First, thank you very much, Don, for giving us a reliable 19x19
> server.
> >
> > Please consider increasing the time a program stays on the list until
> it
> > ages off.  I guess you drop programs from the ratings page after some
> time
> > that depends on the number of games they have played.  Since 19x19
> games
> > take 4 times longs, it seems you should allow four times as much time
> to age
> > off the list, for the same number of games.  I like seeing the top
> program's
> > results a little longer.
> >
> > It would be nice if a program can get into position more quickly.
> Since the
> > games take longer, it can take several days to climb up from the
> initial
> > 1200 to 2000, especially if there is an early loos.  Does it make
> sense to
> > set the initial k value a little higher, or to set the initial rating
> to
> > 1500 instead of 1200?
> >
> > -David
> >
> >
> > ___
> > 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/

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

[computer-go] Some cgos 19x19 suggestions

[David Fotland]

First, thank you very much, Don, for giving us a reliable 19x19 server.

Please consider increasing the time a program stays on the list until it
ages off.  I guess you drop programs from the ratings page after some time
that depends on the number of games they have played.  Since 19x19 games
take 4 times longs, it seems you should allow four times as much time to age
off the list, for the same number of games.  I like seeing the top program's
results a little longer.  

It would be nice if a program can get into position more quickly.  Since the
games take longer, it can take several days to climb up from the initial
1200 to 2000, especially if there is an early loos.  Does it make sense to
set the initial k value a little higher, or to set the initial rating to
1500 instead of 1200?

-David


___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] Re: mogo beats pro!

[David Fotland]

2008 TaiZhou Computer Go Championship

1. The number of participating countries and regions: 20 countries and
regions, including China and the China Taipei. In accordance with the
relevant provisions of BOCOG, The participating teams and all staff from
China Taiwan use "Chinese Taipei" title.
2. The number of entries: 50
3. Competition schedule: September 22 to September 26
  a. 9/22: receiption
  b. 9/23: a round robin preliminaries way
  c. 9/24: a round robin preliminaries way
  d. 9/25: a round robin preliminaries way
  e. 9/26: Final championship matches, and man-machine matches, award
ceremonies 4. Prize competition
  19x19 Go:
  First place,  3,000 USD
  Second place, 2,000 USD
  Third place, 1,000 USD
  Fourth place, 500 USD
  Fifth place,  250 USD

  9x9 Go:
  First place, 2,000 USD.
  Second place, 1,000 USD
  Third place, 500 USD
  Fourth place, 250 USD

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian Osgood
> Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2008 8:50 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Re: mogo beats pro!
> 
> 
> On Aug 9, 2008, at 8:30 AM, David Fotland wrote:
> 
> > Unfortunately the Cotsen conflicts with the Taizhou tournament this
> > year.
> >
> > David
> 
> Could you share some more details about this tournament?
> 
> Ian
> 
> ___
> 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/

[computer-go] CGOS thinks I'm still loggedd on

[David Fotland]

What's the server timeout for logon?  A bot crashed yesterday, and I still
can't log on.  The server says I'm already logged on.  mfgo12-level-0 on the
19x19 server.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Dailey
> Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2008 8:46 AM
> To: Jason House
> Cc: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Program don't start playing on CGOS
> 
> On Sat, 2008-08-09 at 10:42 -0400, Jason House wrote:
> > I hit this problem long ago when CGOS was young. The fix at that time
> > was to send the estimated time until the next round. Eventually, that
> > cluttered the logs and was removed from the server code.
> 
> Wait a minute ...Did you start having the problem again?   I see
> your bot on CGOS all the time,  what changed?
> 
> - Don
> 
> 
> 
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > On Aug 9, 2008, at 9:19 AM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Ben,
> > >
> > > I am having the same exact problem, so I don't think it's anything
> you
> > > are doing wrong.   It seems to have something to do with idling a
> long
> > > time and it only seems to affect certain networks.On my own
> > > machine
> > > and internet connection it never happens.
> > >
> > > But I have access to a machine where it's happening.
> > >
> > > I am also interested if anyone else has run into this and perhaps
> > > solved
> > > it or has an idea what is going on.
> > >
> > > - Don
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, 2008-08-09 at 08:39 +0200, Ben Lambrechts wrote:
> > >> If my program has to wait to long before it gets a game, the
> console
> > >> don't send commands to my program.
> > >>
> > >> I tried all I could think about: I used the tclkit from Equi4 and
> > >> tried ActiveTcl.
> > >> I tried to create a .bat file and run it in the normal console and
> > >> PowerShell.
> > >>
> > >> Can someone help with this problem please?
> > >>
> > >> With kind regards, Ben
> > >>
> > >> 
> > >>
> > >> I followed the instructions from
> > >> http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> go.org/msg04946.html
> > >> and correctly set the server and port in the tcl-script to
> > >> cgos.boardspace.net and 6819
> > >>
> > >> C:\CGOS> tclsh85 cgos3.tcl GtpTest3  MyGtpProgram.exe
> > >> 08:00:20C->E list_commands
> > >> 08:00:22E->C boardsize
> > >> 08:00:22E->C clear_board
> > >> ...
> > >> 08:00:22E->C undo
> > >> 08:00:22E->C version
> > >> 08:00:22recieved full response to list_commands
> > >> 08:00:22Engine uses  time control commands
> > >> 08:00:23Successful connection to CGOS server
> > >> 08:00:23S->C protocol
> > >> 08:00:23C->S e1 CGOS tcl engine client 1.2 Windows-x86 by Don
> > >> Dailey
> > >> 08:00:23S->C username
> > >> 08:00:23C->S GtpTest3
> > >> 08:00:23S->C password
> > >> 08:00:23C->S 
> > >>
> > >> By now a game is started and my program don't get commands from
> the
> > >> console, but it seems that the console also don't get commands
> from
> > >> the server...
> > >> If I try to restart the start-script I get additional lines:
> > >>
> > >> 08:21:50S->C Error: You are already logged on!  Closing
> > >> connection.
> > >> 08:21:50Connection to server has closed.  Will try to
> reconnect
> > >> shortly
> > >>
> > >> And most of the time, my program loses on time because of this.
> But
> > >> sometimes it suddenly connects and plays its game.
> > >>
> > >> ...
> > >> 08:36:38C->E genmove w
> > >> 08:36:38E->C = A10
> > >> 08:36:38C->S A10
> > >> 08:36:38S->C play b PASS 1199968
> > >> 08:36:38C->E play b PASS
> > >> 08:36:38E->C =
> > >> 08:36:39S->C genmove w 300024
> > >> 08:36:39C->E time_left w 300 0
> > >> 08:36:39E->C =
> > >> 08:36:39C->E genmove w
> > >> 08:36:39E->C = J4
> > >> 08:36:39C->S J4
> > >> 08:36:39S->C play b PASS 1199968
> > >> 08:36:39C->E play b PASS
> > >> 08:36:39E->C =
> > >> 08:36:39S->C genmove w 300024
> > >> 08:36:39C->E time_left w 300 0
> > >> 08:36:39E->C =
> > >> 08:36:39C->E genmove w
> > >> 08:36:39E->C = pass
> > >> 08:36:39C->S pass
> > >> 08:36:40S->C gameover 2008-08-09 W+40.5
> > >> 08:36:40C->S ready
> > >>
> > >> And then I have just the same problem, if it has to wait to long
> > >> before the other games are finished, it doesn't start in his next
> > >> game.
> > >> ___
> > >> 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/
> 
> ___
> computer-go mailing list
> computer-go@computer-go.org
> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

_

RE: [computer-go] Re: mogo beats pro!

[David Fotland]

Unfortunately the Cotsen conflicts with the Taizhou tournament this year.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of terry mcintyre
> Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2008 4:47 AM
> To: computer go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Re: mogo beats pro!
> 
> A Mac Pro with 8 cores is already feasible for any moderately well-
> heeled enthusiast; there are a few other lesser-known competitors.
> 
> Which reminds me: the Cotsen tournament is coming up in late September.
> I'm not sure whether computers are allowed to play or not. If so, I'm
> fairly certain that Doshay's Sluggo will compete - provided he can work
> out the issues with his new portable cluster.
> 
> David has said he'd love to see other computer competitors. This is
> contingent on the Cotsen tournament rules -- I'll get that information.
> 
>  Terry McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> 
> - Original Message 
> 
> From: Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: steve uurtamo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: computer-go 
> Sent: Friday, August 8, 2008 11:38:57 AM
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Re: mogo beats pro!
> 
> It could probably be arranged using a modern quad processor or perhaps
> an 8 processor machine (can you easily get those yet?)
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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/

[computer-go] cgos 19x19 has no anchor

[David Fotland]

All three anchors have been off-line since yesterday.

David

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] Re: mogo beats pro!

[David Fotland]

The supercomputer nodes did not have shared memory.  Mogo uses shared memory
within a node, but between nodes it uses MPI message passing.  The
supercomputer has low latency connections between nodes, and the Mogo team
has said that the strength scales better on systems with this kind of
interconnect than on clusters just using Ethernet.

There is an issue with latency because the statistics in the important nodes
of the UCT tree are shared frequently.

Sharing idle time on computers on the internet would be interesting for
postal games, but won't scale up in performance like Mogo on this
supercomputer.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of steve uurtamo
> Sent: Friday, August 08, 2008 2:45 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Re: mogo beats pro!
> 
> hm.  this makes me think back to something.
> 
> did this supercomputer have all of its ram shared
> by all processors?  or could it be emulated by
> a large enough number of machines given individual
> jobs, given that combining the results of those jobs
> isn't too complicated?
> 
> if so, i think that this would be ripe for BOINC -- at
> these time controls, there's no issue with latency,
> and there are clever ways to deal with people
> dropping off of the grid or giving intentionally bad
> information.
> 
> and who wouldn't want to donate idle computer
> time to a project that was, say, sitting on KGS
> and kicking the crap out of decent players?
> 
> lots of people sit on KGS and just simply watch.  why
> not have those idle lurking watchers participate
> in the game as well, with their copious unused cycles?
> 
> s.
> 
> On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 2:12 AM, Darren Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Yes, MoGo gained much more from the longer time setting than Mr. Kim
> >> did. Note that Mr. Kim used very little of his time in the one-hour
> >> game. He said after the match that using more time would not have
> helped
> >> him.
> >
> > I imagine that is typical as white in a handicap game; you play
> solid,
> > good shape moves and wait for black to do something wrong. (I.e.
> strong
> > players can play a dozen simultaneous high-handicap games as easily
> as
> > they can play one high-handicap game.)
> >
> > Darren
> >
> > ___
> > 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/

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] CGOS 19x19 up and running

[David Fotland]

Are the 19x19 web pages working?  I put up the weak many faces bots, and
they are playing games, but they are not showing up on the web pages.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Dailey
> Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2008 8:10 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: [computer-go] CGOS 19x19 up and running
> 
> Ok,
> 
> I have 19x19 up and running.   Instructions are basically the same as
> for 13x13, the only thing changing about the web pages and so on in the
> urls's  is the directory  /19x19/  instead of /13x13/   and the port
> for
> the client is 6819.
> 
> I will update the main web page to reflect the changes and provide
> links
> later.
> 
> - Don
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Location for US Go Congress computer tournament

[David Fotland]

After the tournament I accidentally played two more games against gnugo
(GnuTwo) on KGS, and won them both, so the new version beat gnugo 3 of 3.

Apparently the GnuTwo machine was still on in the computer lab and connected
to KGS.  When I turned on my computer to read e-mail, my kgs script
connected to KGS and the server started another game between ManyFaces1 and
GnuTwo.  I noticed my laptop was really slow, but it had almost finished a
game before I figured out what was going on.  SO I let it finish that one
and play a third one.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian Osgood
> Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 1:19 PM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Location for US Go Congress computer
> tournament
> 
> 
> On Aug 3, 2008, at 12:11 AM, Peter Drake wrote:
> 
> > The Linux lab is in the Fourth Avenue Building, room 81-03. Leave
> > some time to find it; the building is rather labyrinthine.
> >
> > I'll be there by 8:30 AM Monday, possibly a bit earlier, so
> > hopefully people can set up and then go play in the US Open.
> >
> > Peter Drake
> > http://www.lclark.edu/~drake/
> 
> Here are the preliminary results. The tournament had seven players,
> small enough for a double round robin played on KGS.
> 
>   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   | Total
>   ---
> 1. GNU GoXX  11  01  11  11  11  11  |  11
> 2. Many Faces00  XX  11  11  11  11  11  |  10
> 3. Leela 10  00  XX  11  11  11  11  |   9
> 4. House Bot 00  00  00  XX  11  01  11  |   5
> 5. First Go  00  00  00  00  XX  11  11  |   4
> 6. Orego 00  00  00  10  00  XX  11  |   3
> 7. Butter Bot00  00  00  00  00  00  XX  |   0
> 
> 
> Peter will soon be responding with a full report and an official web
> page. Stay tuned for Thursday's match between 3000-node MoGo and an 8-
> dan Korean professional!
> 
> Notes:
> --
> In MF-Leela, Many Faces was running at half speed because David
> Fotland's T61 laptop was unplugged!
> 
> This version of MF uses Monte Carlo search, and was built in June
> (the current work on multi-core Monte Carlo was not ready.)
> 
> GNU Go 3.7.10 (level 12) replaced Sluggo due to problems with
> Sluggo's cluster.
> 
> First Go was running at a faster time control for its first games due
> to operator error.
> 
> In the Leela-GNU match, KGS reported a win for GNU under Japanese
> rules,
>   but the actual result is a win for for Leela under Chinese rules.
> 
> During the final round, David Fotland fixed and validated his multi-
> threaded code.
> This version of Many Faces won an exhibition game with GNU Go. This
> version will also play in tomorrow's tournament at the European Go
> Congress.
> 
> Ian
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Ladders and UCT again

[David Fotland]

I keep a count of the number of liberties for each string of stones.  It's
updated incrementally when each stone is placed.  I only use it for finding
captures.  I don't read ladders during playouts.

Keeping liberty counts is not expensive.  I was getting 50k playouts per
second on a 2.3 GHz Core2 Duo (1 CPU) just running random playouts without
UCT.  With UCT, 3x3 patterns, simple local tactical responses, superko test
at uct nodes, etc, it slowed down to 30k playouts/second.  Incorporating
Many Faces and RAVE into the UCT search slowed it down to 12K
playouts/second, but made it much stronger.  All of these numbers are for
9x9.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lukasz Lew
> Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2008 3:50 PM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Ladders and UCT again
> 
> Can you describe your algorithms?
> 
> Cheers,
> Lukasz
> 
> On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 19:36, Hideki Kato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > David Fotland: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >>I keep liberty counts.
> >
> > Me too.  Also is Hiroshi.
> >
> > -Hideki
> >
> >>David
> >>
> >>> -Original Message-
> >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason House
> >>> Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2008 6:43 AM
> >>> To: computer-go
> >>> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Ladders and UCT again
> >>>
> >>> On Aug 2, 2008, at 4:31 AM, Gunnar Farneb ck
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > It's often a good idea to bias capturing moves in the playouts,
> >>> > regardless whether it's a ladder or not. This would result in
> those
> >>> > stones being captured in most simulations.
> >>>
> >>> What method do people use for finding capture moves in playouts?
> >>> Pseudo liberties can miss simple stuff like open triangles and one-
> >>> eyed groups. Additionally, some literature discusses captures to
> add
> >>> group liberties. What's the preferred method to detect
> >>> that?___
> >>> 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/
> > --
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kato)
> > ___
> > 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/

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] Ladders and UCT again

[David Fotland]

I keep liberty counts.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason House
> Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2008 6:43 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Ladders and UCT again
> 
> On Aug 2, 2008, at 4:31 AM, Gunnar Farneb�ck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> 
> > It's often a good idea to bias capturing moves in the playouts,
> > regardless whether it's a ladder or not. This would result in those
> > stones being captured in most simulations.
> 
> What method do people use for finding capture moves in playouts?
> Pseudo liberties can miss simple stuff like open triangles and one-
> eyed groups. Additionally, some literature discusses captures to add
> group liberties. What's the preferred method to detect
> that?___
> 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] What Do You Need Most?

[David Fotland]

I prefer keeping 9x9.  We have 9x9 for quick testing of changes (because the
games are fast), and 19x19 for testing play on a full board.  I don't think
13x13 adds anything.  It's slower, so I would still use 9x9 for quick tests.
It's not a board size that anyone uses, so I would still use 19x19 to test
for full boards.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Dailey
> Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 6:00 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] What Do You Need Most?
> 
> Of course KGS is certainly more polished than CGOS.
> 
> However, it looks like we can eventually solve the growing pains of
> CGOS, I am working on something now.
> 
> My question to the group, especially those using CGOS, is whether you
> would be in favor, or opposed to replacing 9x9 with 13x13?
> 
> - Don
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, 2008-07-31 at 08:05 -0400, Jason House wrote:
> > On Jul 30, 2008, at 6:55 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > I think someone already has a website somewhere where they try to
> rank
> > > bots based on KGS games.
> >
> > I'm pretty sure the site stopped doing rankings when KGS moved to
> > gokgs.com
> >
> >
> > > If you can figure out how to make it
> > > schedule games fairly and consistently then go for it.
> >
> > I doubt you'd get the CGOS style for either of these out of the box.
> >
> > Scheduling for automatch is likely a first-come, first-serve basis,
> > probably with some kind of anti-repeat feature. Having engines
> > reconnect at the start of a round could help fairness issues.
> > Randomized connection times could be helpful too.
> >
> > KGS would limit games to within 9 stones and would automatically give
> > handicap, but I consider that a good thing.
> >
> > Obviously, the more wms helps (or lets us provide code, the better
> > things will be. I doubt we'd get anywhere without Nick Wedd backing
> > the idea, and he probably wouldn't if you don't. A KGS alternative
> may
> > never be as good as a custom computer go server, but if it's close,
> it
> > has other side benefits... Game caches, wider human audiences,
> > potential integration with human play, etc
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > I want to be
> > > able to put my bot on line,  leave it alone for a day or more,  and
> > > know
> > > it will play only other computers under a consistent rule set and
> > > get a
> > > ranking.  Also I want to know that you can't just disconnect and to
> > > abort lost games.  I don't want the same player playing it 20 games
> > > in a
> > > row and so on.   If you can get all that to happen without WMS
> > > support,
> > > then I'm definitely interested.
> > >
> > >
> > > - Don
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 18:20 -0400, Jason House wrote:
> > >> Where there's a will, there's a way. It may not be hard to use
> auto
> > >> match with the self-proclamed bot ranks as a first step
> > >> approximation.
> > >> All that's needed for that is to allow bots to be paired against
> each
> > >> other. Ratings could be computed offline and used by a kgsGtp
> wrapper
> > >> to update the self-proclaimed ratings between games.
> > >>
> > >> Everything else could be incremental tweaks as issues are
> identified.
> > >>
> > >> Sent from my iPhone
> > >>
> > >> On Jul 30, 2008, at 5:07 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> I like KGS and the maturity of it compared to CGOS.   However,
> > >>> it's a
> > >>> different problem.   KGS doesn't schedule games for you.
> > >>>
> > >>> I also tried to persuade WMS to rate 9x9 bot games, but he was
> > >>> unwilling
> > >>> to add more indexes and overhead to the database.   And even if
> he
> > >>> agreed, sometimes I want to play other bots, although I like the
> > >>> idea of
> > >>> being able to play humans when I want that.   Still,  it's a
> > >>> scheduling
> > >>> issue that KGS just doesn't support.
> > >>>
> > >>> If WMS had made a computer go server that looks like KGS but does
> > >>> the
> > >>> scheduling and rating for bots only (or given a choice with
> humans
> > >>> too)
> > >>> and such, I would have never written CGOS.   If he does it later,
> I
> > >>> would probably prefer it to CGOS and would use it instead.
> > >>>
> > >>> - Don
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 15:35 -0400, Jason House wrote:
> >  Maybe we should approach wms about using KGS. Rank and pairings
> >  could
> >  be computed separately. Once upon a time, there was a page that
> >  computed 9x9 bot ratings
> > 
> >  Sent from my iPhone
> > 
> >  On Jul 30, 2008, at 3:16 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > 
> > > There seems to be something special about 9x9 go for computers,
> > > it's
> > > very popular, perhaps because it's so much more approachable.
> > >
> > > However I personally think it's time to start looking at bigger
> > > board
> > > sizes ser

RE: [computer-go] re: What Do You Need Most?

[David Fotland]

If Dave takes PayPal, you can add "Donate $1" and "Donate $5" buttons to the
cgos web page.  I would donate if it's easy.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Dailey
> Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2008 7:47 PM
> To: Dave Dyer
> Cc: computer-go
> Subject: [computer-go] re: What Do You Need Most?
> 
> 2 GB would make is much more comfortable.  But I do like that it's
> hosted on boardspace as boardspace already specializes in games, so I
> am
> not particularly eager to move away from it.
> 
> It's a gift that Dave Dyer allows us to use it and it's appreciated.
> 
> Maybe some of us who use it could consider a small donation to Dave,
> even if only a few bucks?
> 
> 
> - Don
> 
> 
> On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 18:47 -0700, Dave Dyer wrote:
> > Boardspace is a VPS, so CGOS is currently running as a subaccount of
> a
> > VPS.  Boardspace is going to be upgraded sometime in the next few
> > months, which will allow me to add another 1GB to CGOS allocation.
> >
> > Or, if computer Go gets a rich sugar daddy, spending $400/yr
> > for your own VPS would be an excellent first investment.
> >
> > --
> >
> 
> ___
> 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] What Do You Need Most?

[David Fotland]

On one processor the current experimental version 12 has a 4 kyu kgs rating.
The new algorithms scale well to multiple processor cores, and 8 processor
PCs with the new Intel 8 core chip will be available late this year.

I haven't tried handicap games, but the new version beats many faces 11 over
90% of even games.  I was planning to have it ready for the go congress, but
it won't be.  I might bring some CDs I make myself...

Right now you can only play them on KGS.  

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray Tayek
> Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 11:44 PM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: RE: [computer-go] What Do You Need Most?
> 
> At 07:53 PM 7/27/2008, you wrote:
> >The traditional programs are around 10 kyu, but the new ones are 2 to
> 4 kyu,
> >at least on KGS.  I've seen some handicap games against dan players
> that are
> >consistent with these ratings.
> 
> wow. that's impressive. can one buy these or just play the on kgs?
> 
> >It wouldn't surprise me to see 1 dan from an MC program before 2010,
> running
> >on an 8 processor mainstream system.
> >
> >David
> 
> 1-dan in two years? i must give your opinion a lot a weight, but i
> remain skeptical.
> 
> how strong will the next version of manyfaces be? (and when can i buy
> it).
> 
> 
> 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray Tayek
> > > Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 7:09 PM
> > > To: computer-go
> > > Subject: Re: [computer-go] What Do You Need Most?
> > >
> > > At 06:23 PM 7/27/2008, you wrote:
> > > >I have a strong interest in seeing a 19x19 computer go program
> that is
> > > >at least 3-dan by 2010.
> > >
> > > we all do. but as the programs are only about 10-kyu these days, we
> > > will be lucky to get to the small kyu ratings by 2010 and then you
> > > will hit a hard wall.
> > >
> > > i think michael is correct when he mentions incentive. there are
> not
> > > to many $'s out there to go after.
> > >
> > > some of us try to get the programs into tournaments (like
> > > http://www.cotsengotournament.com/), but the aga refuses to allow
> the
> > > games for credit. ...
> 
> ---
> vice-chair http://ocjug.org/
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] What Do You Need Most?

[David Fotland]

The traditional programs are around 10 kyu, but the new ones are 2 to 4 kyu,
at least on KGS.  I've seen some handicap games against dan players that are
consistent with these ratings.

It wouldn't surprise me to see 1 dan from an MC program before 2010, running
on an 8 processor mainstream system.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray Tayek
> Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 7:09 PM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] What Do You Need Most?
> 
> At 06:23 PM 7/27/2008, you wrote:
> >I have a strong interest in seeing a 19x19 computer go program that is
> >at least 3-dan by 2010.
> 
> we all do. but as the programs are only about 10-kyu these days, we
> will be lucky to get to the small kyu ratings by 2010 and then you
> will hit a hard wall.
> 
> i think michael is correct when he mentions incentive. there are not
> to many $'s out there to go after.
> 
> some of us try to get the programs into tournaments (like
> http://www.cotsengotournament.com/), but the aga refuses to allow the
> games for credit.
> 
> thanks
> 
> ---
> vice-chair http://ocjug.org/
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] UCB1-Tuned distribution

[David Fotland]

I never used it.  I wrote my code after Mogo said they had abandoned it, so
I never even tried it.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Stogin
> Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 10:45 AM
> To: computer-go@computer-go.org
> Subject: [computer-go] UCB1-Tuned distribution
> 
> It seems that the UCB1-Tuned algorithm uses variance from a normal
> distribution, however we believe it would be more optimal to use
> variance from a beta distribution. Has any work been done in this
> area? Are people still using UCB1-Tuned to guide their explorations of
> moves?
> 
> Thanks,
> John Stogin
> ___
> 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] Super ko in random playouts

[David Fotland]

There can be more than 3 kos in a cycle.  There are some pathological cases
of loops involving captures of two-stone groups, but I've never seen this in
a real game.

Here are some example odd positions:
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~wjh/go/rules/bestiary.html
http://www.goban.demon.co.uk/go/bestiary/molasses_ko.html

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason House
> Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 8:19 PM
> To: computer-go@computer-go.org
> Subject: [computer-go] Super ko in random playouts
> 
> I now tracked down another super ko bug.  I'm curious if anyone has
> worked out which infinite cyles can occur in random playouts that avoid
> eye-fills and suicides.  Additionally, how do people handle this type
> of situation in playouts?  I believe libego checks game length and
> assigns "no result" if the game is too long.  This certainly seems
> simple enough to do...
> 
> A single ko will either be a capture when one side takes it or else
> it'll be legal to fill the ko when the other side passes from no legal
> moves left.
> 
> A double ko can end up with one side owning both ko's, so either the ko
> will naturally do a capture, or filling a ko will be legal.
> 
> A triple ko occurred in the attached game.  It's 3 ko's between two
> eyeless groups.  Each time a color can move, it owns 1 out of 3 ko's,
> and has only one legal move option, take the only legal ko (according
> to simple ko rules)
> 
> Can any other triple ko situations occur?  What about more complex ko
> situations?  I think the triple ko is the only case, but I have not
> rigorously proven it.

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] Incremental move weights

[David Fotland]

I only use proximity in the search.  My playouts are pretty light.

 

David

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 4:54 PM
To: computer-go@computer-go.org
Subject: Re: [computer-go] Incremental move weights

 

I  use proximity in the heavy playouts themselves. I think most (all?)
people do this. I have a precalculated table with the 3x3 and 5x5 neighbors
for every position on the board. 

- Dave Hillis


-Original Message-
From: Jason House <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: computer-go 
Sent: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 7:32 pm
Subject: [computer-go] Incremental move weights

I'm starting heavy plyouts, with variable move selection weights. The
proximity heuristic seems like a performance killer since most weights would
require an update with each move. 
 
How do others handle this? Is proximity reserved for the search tree? 
 
How do others store data for rapid lookup? 
 
Sent from my iPhone 
___ 
computer-go mailing list 
computer-go@computer-go.org 
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ 

  _  

The Famous, the Infamous, the Lame - in your browser. Get
  the
TMZ Toolbar Now! 

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] linux and windows

[David Fotland]

I strongly agree with Remi.  Nick is going out of his way to allow people to
enter, and putting a lot of time to set this up.  He deserves praise and
thanks, not complaints.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rémi Coulom
> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 1:35 PM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] linux and windows
> 
> Don Dailey wrote:
> >
> > But all of this presents another issue - most of us don't like to be
> > forced to work in another environment.   It really is far more
> logical
> > to accommodate the programmers when it is not so difficult to do so
> > and especially when it requires much less total effort than making
> > several of them accommodate you because you don't want to be
> bothered.
> >
> >
> > This is surely much more likely to produce a smoothly running
> > tournament than to force some of the players out of their element and
> > requiring them to cope the best they can.
> 
> Your post seems to suggest that Nick is not making enough efforts for
> that tournament, and I think that would be very unfair to him.
> 
> 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] linux and windows

[David Fotland]

I didn't mean to start a war.  I was reacting to the word "chauvinistic"
which to me implies a willful, unfair bias.  I use linux and Windows.  I
ship Windows products solely because the installed base is much higher.  If
I were to set up a tournament and only had time to support one platform, it
would be windows, not because of bias, but because it is more popular and
easier to set up (because the person setting it up will be more familiar
with it, or because it my machine comes with it preinstalled and pretested).
I don't think there is any chauvinism here, so there is no need to insult
the organizers by calling names.  Windows is just more popular.  

I've participated in tournaments where the only machines were Linux.  I
didn't call the orgainizers chauvinistic.  I just turned off the gui,
recompiled, and participated.  

I'm not calling the organizers chauvinistic because they only support GTP
and KGS.  GTP has become more popular than the old GMP tournament protocol,
so now I support it.  No big deal, and no need to complain.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Boon
> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 12:54 PM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] linux and windows
> 
> Seems David instigated a nice little platform war :)
> 
> Oh, platform discussions are sooo 1990s. Don't you guys use a
> platform independent language yet?
> 
> OK, time to duck...
> 
> 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/

[computer-go] linux and windows

[David Fotland]

It irks me a little that Linux people refuse to consider porting their
programs to Windows :)  With cygwin, it's pretty easy to port Linux
programs.  Since these programs work on CGOS they have a gtp interface, so
they don't even need cygwin.  Just recompile using gcc and use a free GTP
windows GUI.  It's pretty trivial.

Not trolling for flames, just expressing an opinion.  If someone is not
willing to put in one day effort to port from Linux to Windows, why should
they expect anyone else to put in one day effort to make Linux available as
a platform?  It seems Linux people are just as chauvinistic as Windows
people :)

David 

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Dailey
> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 9:18 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Computer Go tournament at EGC, Leksand,
> Sweden
> 
> 
> 
> Erik van der Werf wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 3:53 PM, Nick Wedd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Steenvreter   no   yes
> >>
> >
> > Hi Nick,
> >
> > I never said yes. At this point it is rather unlikely that
> Steenvreter
> > will participate. Steenvreter only runs on linux. Since the machines
> > in Leksand run windows and remote computation is not allowed (which
> is
> > funny considering the tournament is on KGS) I pretty much have to be
> > present myself.
> That always irks me when I hear this kind of thing.   The world is
> basically windows "chauvinistic" and it's common to find little
> consideration given to any other platform.
> 
> Did you know that you can create your own linux environment without
> having to "touch" the machine you will be using?   My wife has her own
> windows machine that she doesn't want me "touching",  but I have a
> complete linux install via an external hard drive that leaves her
> machine "untouched."  Although the install is specific to that
> machine, it is easy to build "universal" setups that will boot on any
> modern PC into Linux, without touching the hard drive of that
> machine.This would require that you bring a memory stick of some
> kind or perhaps an external USB hard drive.You can get big ones
> really cheap now, and they are very compact. You plug it into the
> USB port and then boot into Linux.
> 
> In my opinion, the tournament organizers should do this for you and the
> other potential Linux participants since Linux is becoming more and
> more
> popular and apparently it is already very popular with Go
> programmers. There are several possibilities for setting up
> machines
> that could use either Windows or Linux that would not require major
> effort on their part - just one good Linux guy helping them.
> 
> I also feel for the Mac people and also people that have built programs
> that run on networks of workstations or other potential supercomputer
> programs that would not be able to participate.
> 
> - Don
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > I did not find cheap flights for a short visit and I
> > probably won't have time to attend the EGC for a full week, also
> > housing seems to be getting difficult.
> >
> > So for now better assume that Steenvreter will *not* participate in
> Leksand.
> >
> > Erik
> > ___
> > 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/

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

[computer-go] Many Faces and UCT

[David Fotland]

I've been working on combining UCT search with Many Faces for about 6 months
now.  Since I'm entering the computer go tournaments at the go congresses, I
decided to go public on the go servers.

Mfgo12-0617 is Many Faces' engine with UCT search, running on a single 2.3
GHz CPU.  It seems competitive with UCT/MC programs on 4 or 8 CPUs.

The "tryinguct" programs on CGOS were my development experiments.

I hope to have it running on multiple CPUs soon, but I don't know if it
wills cale as well as the pure UCT/MC programs.

David


___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] Computer Go tournament at EGC, Leksand, Sweden

[David Fotland]

Make Many Faces yes for both board sizes (if there are enough operators).

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nick Wedd
> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 6:53 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: [computer-go] Computer Go tournament at EGC, Leksand, Sweden
> 
> The European Go Congress (see http://egc2008.eu/en/congress/index.php)
> will be held in Leksand, Sweden from July 26th to August 9th.  On
> Wednesday August 6th it will include a Computer Go event (see
> http://www.computer-go.info/egc2008/).
> 
> Entry to this is free.  If you would like to enter but cannot be there
> yourself, it should be possible for you to send in your program, and I
> will try to find an operator for it.
> 
> According to my records, entries so far are:
> 
>19x199x9
> CrazyStonepossible possible
> FirstGo   yes  yes
> GNU Goprobable probable
> HouseBot  no   yes
> Leela probable yes
> Mango possible possible
> Many Faces of Go  yes  no
> Steenvreter   no   yes
> Toaster   no   possible
> TSGo  probable no
> Tuuppari  yes  yes
> valkyria  possible possible
> Wei2Goprobable no
> 
> I expect this table needs correcting and bringing up to date.
> Corrections and updates may be posted to this list or sent to me
> privately, as you prefer.  Late entries are also welcome.
> 
> The programs will be run on Windows Vista PCs in Leksand, connected to
> KGS, where the games will be played.
> 
> Of the programs listed above, TSGo (by Ivo Tonkes) and Tuuppari (by a
> team of Finnish programmers) have never, so far as I know, competed in
> a
> KGS tournament.  I would like both those programs to play in a trial
> tournament on KGS, to ensure that they are correctly configured for
> tournament play, rather than finding out that they aren't on the day of
> the event.  I am willing to set up such a trial tournament whenever
> requested - it will use very short time limits, and no-one will care
> who
> wins, the purpose will be to test their handling of the tournament
> settings.  However I suspect that neither of these programs yet has its
> Windows version in a presentable state.  I hope to hear soon from Ivo
> Tonkes and Mika Urtela about this - if I don't, I shall assume that
> they
> aren't reading this list, and email them privately.
> 
> I owe two pints of beer to "the GNU Go team".  I expect to deliver
> these
> to Gunnar, if he is there to operate GNU Go.  Gunnar will also be
> speaking on computer Go, after the tournament.
> 
> Nick
> --
> Nick Wedd[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ___
> 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] Congratulations to CrazyStone and to StoneCrazy!

[David Fotland]

ManyFaces1 (formal) is the new UCT player.  ManyFaces2 (open) is the
alpha-beta searcher.  The alpha-beta engine did much better than I expected.

ManyFaces1 was running on one CPU of a 2.33 GHz core2 Duo.  ManyFaces2 was
on one CPU of a 2.0 GHz Core2 Duo.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nick Wedd
> Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 10:00 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: [computer-go] Congratulations to CrazyStone and to StoneCrazy!
> 
> CrazyStone and StoneCrazy were the winners of the two divisions of
> yesterday's bot tournament.  Both were undefeated.
> 
> My report is at http://www.weddslist.com/kgs/past/40/index.html.  It is
> quite short, but this in no way reflects on the participants.  The
> standard of play was particularly high.
> 
> I would, as usual, appreciate it if readers would report mistakes.
> David
> Fotland and Jason House, in particular, may have corrections to make.
> 
> Nick
> --
> Nick Wedd[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ___
> 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] 2008 World 9x9 Computer Go Championship in Taiwan

[David Fotland]

Is there any word on the Gifu tournament in Japan, which is usually in
September?

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rémi Coulom
> Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 8:59 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: [computer-go] 2008 World 9x9 Computer Go Championship in
> Taiwan
> 
> Hi,
> 
> This was just announced on the ICGA Tournaments web site:
> http://go.nutn.edu.tw/eng/main_eng.htm
> 
> It is right before the Computer Olympiad, and registration is free for
> participants in the Olympiad.
> 
> 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] July KGS bot tournament: full boards, slow

[David Fotland]

I'd like to register ManyFaces1 for formal and ManyFaces2 for open.

ManyFaces1 will be running on one core of a 2.4 GHz Core Duo.  ManyFaces2
will be running on one core of a 2.0 GHz Core Duo.

Regards,

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nick Wedd
> Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 3:49 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: [computer-go] July KGS bot tournament: full boards, slow
> 
> Registration is now open for this Sunday's bot tournament on KGS. Both
> divisions will be 5-round Swiss using 19x19 boards, 43 minutes each
> sudden death.  The Formal division will start at 15:00 UTC (=GMT), and
> the Open division five minutes later.  They will end seven and a half
> hours later.
> 
> Registration is as described at
> http://www.weddslist.com/kgs/how/index.html
> I shall be away from home from later today until Thursday, so I may be
> unable to acknowledge your registration until I return on Thursday
> evening.
> 
> When you register you should tell me the processor power (number of
> processors, processor speed, and any other significant details) of the
> platform that it will be running on.  This is so that the processor
> power can be stated on my report of the event, making comparisons
> between programs more meaningful for anyone reading the report.  I have
> limited understanding of this information, and am likely to publish it
> as given, see for example the final section of
> http://www.weddslist.com/kgs/past/39/index.html
> 
> The tournaments themselves are on the KGS site at
> http://www.gokgs.com/tournInfo.jsp?id=397 and
> http://www.gokgs.com/tournInfo.jsp?id=398.
> These pages may give the times of the rounds in your local timezone,
> depending on your browser and its settings.
> 
> Nick
> --
> Nick Wedd[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ___
> 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] manyfaces on KGS

[David Fotland]

It's a mix.  It uses all of Many Faces go knowledge, combined with a UCT
search.  The UCT search is much stronger than the alpha-beta search I had
before.

On the 9x9 cgos, it’s been playing as "tryinguct".

Regards,

Davdi

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Petri Pitkanen
> Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 10:17 PM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] manyfaces on KGS
> 
> Is the KGS manyfacesofgo MC version or traditional. Just seems to
> tenuki quite MC fashion
> 
> Petri Pitkänen
> 
> 
> --
> Petri Pitkänen
> e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ___
> 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/

[computer-go] cgos 19x19 is down

[David Fotland]

-David

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] 19x19 CGOS server down?

[David Fotland]

My clients all got "irregular response from the server" at the first move of
the game, and it won't let them reconnect.  Says they are already logged on.
SO maybe there is still some problem.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Seth Pellegrino
> Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 1:35 PM
> To: computer-go@computer-go.org
> Subject: [computer-go] 19x19 CGOS server down?
> 
> Has anyone else been successful at playing games on the 19x19 CGOS
> server at
> cgos.lri.fr:6919? We've been unable to connect, and the current
> standings page
> (available at: http://www.lri.fr/~teytaud/cgosStandings.html ) shows
> the last
> game as being completed on June 3rd. Does anyone know what the
> situation is?
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> Seth Pellegrino
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] 19x19 CGOS server down?

[David Fotland]

Seems to be working now.  I restarted the low level Many Faces, and added a
strong Many Faces.

Looks like the reference gnugo is still missing though.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Seth Pellegrino
> Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 1:35 PM
> To: computer-go@computer-go.org
> Subject: [computer-go] 19x19 CGOS server down?
> 
> Has anyone else been successful at playing games on the 19x19 CGOS
> server at
> cgos.lri.fr:6919? We've been unable to connect, and the current
> standings page
> (available at: http://www.lri.fr/~teytaud/cgosStandings.html ) shows
> the last
> game as being completed on June 3rd. Does anyone know what the
> situation is?
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> Seth Pellegrino
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] 2008 CGF special meeting result

[David Fotland]

Congratulations to Aya.  What hardware was used for Aya?

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hiroshi Yamashita
> Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 3:24 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: [computer-go] 2008 CGF special meeting result
> 
> CGF special meeting was held at Akihabara, Tokyo in 21th - 22th June
> 2008.
> 
> 9x9 participants were 10 teams.
> Aya won by 7-0. Second was Katsunari, Fudo Go and GNU Go by 5-2.
> GNU Go entered as a guest.
> 
> 19x19 participants were 8 teams.
> Aya won by 7-0. Second was Katsunari by 6-1, third was Fudo Go by 5-2.
> Aya used Xeon 2.66GHz x8 cores.
> 
> 9x9 result. 15 minutes sudden death. Komi 7.5. Chinese rule.
>  2008/06/21 Akihabara Dai building 13F
> 
>Aya Kat car GNU Kur DM  Tom Boo Fud MC  Wins Rank
> Aya 1   1   1   1   1   1   1  7-0   1
> Katsunari   0   0   1   1   1   1   1  5-2   2
> caren   0   1  11   0   1   0  2-5   8
> GNU Go  1   1   1   1   0   0   1  5-2   2
> Kuronekonya 0   0   0   0   0   1   0  1-6   9
> Drunken Master  0   0  00   0   1   0  3-4   6
> Tombo   0   0   1   1   1   0   1  4-3   5
> Boozer  0   0   0   0   0   0   0  0-7  10
> Fudo Go 0   0   1   1   1   1   1  5-2   2
> MC_ark  0   1   0   1   0   1   0  3-4   6
> 
> 1. First plan was round robin. But for time schedule, last 7 round was
> like swiss system paring. So caren - Drunken Master played two
> games(change black and white).
> 2. Gnu Go version was 3.7.12. It was classical, not using monte-carlo
> option.
> 3. Games played hand by hand.
> 
> 
> 19x19 result. 30 minutes sudden death. Komi 6.5. Japanese rule.
>  2008/06/21-22 Akihabara Dai building 13F
> 
> Aya Kat Fud car GOG Kin igo May Wins Rank
> Aya  1   1   1   1   1   1   1  7-0   1
> Katsunari0   1   1   1   1   1   1  6-1   2
> Fudo Go  0   0   1   1   1   1   1  5-2   3
> caren0   0   0   0   1   1   1  3-4   4
> GOGATAKI 0   0   0   1   0   1   1  3-4   4
> Kinoa Igo0   0   0   0   1   1   1  3-4   4
> igoist   0   0   0   0   0   0   1  1-6   7
> MayoiGo  0   0   0   0   0   0   0  0-7   8
> 
> 1. GOGATAKI lost Kinoa on time.
> 2. Games played via nngs server.
> 
> 
> Program Author
> 
> Aya Hiroshi Yamashita
> Katsunari   Shinichi Sei
> caren   Katsumi Kobayashi
> GNU Go  Free Software Foundation
> KuronekoNya Yasuhiro Ike
> Drunken Master  Yasuo Hirooka
> Tombo   Yohei Yano
> Boozer  Chihiro Hashimoto
> Fudo Go Hideki Katoh
> MC_ark  Nobuo Araki
> GOGATAKIShigetaka Kudomi
> Kinoa Igo   Genki Yamada
> igoist  Masamichi Inagawa
> MayoiGo Masaki Murayama
> 
> SGF files
> http://hp.vector.co.jp/authors/VA012620/cgf2008/cgf2008.zip
> 
> Some photos
> First day
> http://yssaya.web.fc2.com/photo/20080622cgf/20080621/index01.html
> Second day
> http://yssaya.web.fc2.com/photo/20080622cgf/20080622/index01.html
> 
> CGF special meeting page (in Japanese)
> http://hp.vector.co.jp/authors/VA012620/
> 
> Regards,
> Hiroshi Yamashita
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Re: US Go Congress Computer Tournament: Who's Playing

[David Fotland]

I haven't decided yet.  I probably don't have the time, but it's close and I
might do it.

 

David

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Drake
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 9:59 PM
To: Computer Go
Subject: [computer-go] Re: US Go Congress Computer Tournament: Who's Playing

 

So far we've had two entries, both with caveats.

 

Could others please sound off on whether you're coming, and if not, why not?

 

1) Can't afford the time

2) Can't afford the money

3) Don't feel my program is strong enough to compete

4) Have a conflicting event

5) Other (please explain)

 

Thanks,

 

Peter Drake

http://www.lclark.edu/~drake/

 





 

On Jun 9, 2008, at 10:25 AM, Peter Drake wrote:





We'd like to get an estimate of numbers. Who's planning to enter the US Go
Congress Computer Go Tournament?

 

Here is the latest version of the info on the tournament:

 

Computer Go Tournament

Tournament Director

Peter Drake (AND CO-DIRECTOR?)

Description

This 19x19 tournament is for computer programs only. While there have been
notable breakthroughs in recent years, computer Go remains an open problem
in artificial intelligence research.

Location

NEED LOCATION (at US Go Congress in Portland, Oregon)

Schedule

Rounds will be played as games are completed, beginning at 1:00 PM, Sunday,
August 3. Time permitting, we hope to run a double round-robin tournament.

Time Limits

60 minutes per player, no byo-yomi. If there are many entrants, we may
reduce this to 45 minutes per player.

Rules

To give programmers as much time as possible to work out networking bugs, we
will use the same rules as the monthly KGS computer go tournaments. These
rules can be found at http://www.weddslist.com/kgs/. Of particular note are
that programs must implement GTP and that Chinese (area) scoring is used.

All hardware must be physically present in the competition room. Programs
may not rely on any remote resources. Programmers must be able to roughly
explain and demonstrate the program's "thought process", e.g., by showing
logging output as the program responds to an arbitrary position. Programmers
may bring their own hardware; we will also provide some machines (NEED
DESCRIPTION).

Programs must be entered by the authors, although authors who cannot attend
the Congress may sent alternate operators. If a program is based on another
program (e.g., GNU Go or MoGo), it must contain a significant amount of new
code. The tournament director has final say over what constitutes a
"significant amount"; as a guideline, a radically different search algorithm
or life-and-death evaluator would be significant, but tweaking some
parameters or adding new patterns to a database would not.  Such derivative
entries must include written permission from the authors of the original
program. If you have any doubts about the eligibility of your program,
contact the TD before buying an airline ticket!

Prizes

Prize money has been donated by Hierarchical Systems Research Foundation and
other anonymous donors. At a minimum, the following prizes will be awarded:

1st place$400
2nd place   $200
3rd place   $100
4th place   $50

 

 

Peter Drake

http://www.lclark.edu/~drake/

 





 

 

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] Tournament at US Go Congress

[David Fotland]

Often one program resigns early.  Usually the programs don't use all of
their time, but more like 80% or 90% of it.
If any traditional programs enter they will finish much earlier.

If you schedule rigid round start times, you have to allow for the worst
case possible time for both programs, and some extra time to figure out the
pairings between rounds.  You will also need rigid times for meal breaks.
Your 22 ronnd would probably take more like 44 hours to play, 10 hours for
breaks (one hour for meals every four hours), and 4 hours for pairings, so
55-60 hours total.  Free pairing should use about 1.5 hours per round, and
you can let programs that are behind play though breaks, and you don't need
any time to do pairings, so you can finish in about 33 hours.

The other alternative to allow round robin would be to shorten the time per
program from 60 minutes to 45 minutes.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Drake
> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 9:14 PM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Tournament at US Go Congress
> 
> On Jun 4, 2008, at 7:07 PM, David Doshay wrote:
> 
> > I would like to strongly suggest that enough rounds be run that
> > every program plays every other program twice, once as B and once
> > as W.
> 
> This seems like a good idea, but I have two concerns:
> 
> 1) Can the KGS tournament system support this? Nick, Bill?
> 
> 2) If we get, say, a dozen programs, each program will have to play
> 22 games, right? That's conceivably 44 hours.
> 
> I was at first mystified by David Fotland's comment that "A round
> robin can get many more rounds in the same time." Are you pointing
> out that, if programs resign, other rounds can begin? Do a lot of the
> KGS monthly tournament games end in resignation with a lot of time
> left on the clock? Monte Carlo players tend to use almost all of
> their time.
> 
> Perhaps I should say something like, "Time permitting, we will run a
> double round-robin tournament."
> 
> > As set, the schedule does not have breaks for meals, and I think
> > that for the health and happiness of the programmers, such breaks
> > would be a good idea. I know that 3 days in a row without a proper
> > dinner break will be very hard on my stomach.
> 
> For what it's worth, the current schedule has dinner from 5:30-7:00.
> 
> Peter Drake
> http://www.lclark.edu/~drake/
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Tournament at US Go Congress

[David Fotland]

I would second the idea of a full double round robin.  This makes scheduling
much easier.  There is no need for fixed round start times.  In a swiss
tournament you have to wait for everyone to finish, then figure the new
pairings.  A round robin can get many more rounds in the same time.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Doshay
> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 7:08 PM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Tournament at US Go Congress
> 
> With the possible exception of the Mogo team, I think that having to
> haul computers is a bigger deal to me than anybody else, and I just
> accept it as part of the process right now.
> 
> I think it is the right idea to run it on KGS because it gives
> programmers the ability to try everything out in advance, and it also
> gives the great wide world the ability to watch. If it was run on KGS
> and participants did not have to be there in person, it would be
> nearly indistinguishable from a monthly KGS tournament.
> 
> I would like to strongly suggest that enough rounds be run that every
> program plays every other program twice, once as B and once as W.
> 
> As set, the schedule does not have breaks for meals, and I think that
> for the health and happiness of the programmers, such breaks would be
> a good idea. I know that 3 days in a row without a proper dinner break
> will be very hard on my stomach.
> 
> Cheers,
> David
> 
> 
> 
> On 4, Jun 2008, at 4:43 PM, Peter Drake wrote:
> 
> >>
> >> Will the games be played on KGS using network connections from the
> >> contest site, or will you provide a referee program?  If the games
> >> are played on KGS, why do people have to drag their computers to
> >> Portland?
> >>
> >
> > We will use KGS. There are three reasons for having competitors
> > present in person:
> >
> > 1) As an anti-cheating measure. Since there is money at stake, we
> > don't want to make it trivial for a strong human player to
> > masquerade as a program.
> >
> > 2) As a sort of scientific conference, giving Go programmers an
> > opportunity to network in a way that is not possible over email.
> >
> > 3) To create an event on which the media can report.
> >
> >
> 
> ___
> 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] Computer Olympiad registration reminder: 11 days left

[David Fotland]

Thanks!  I just registered.  Who else is going?

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rémi Coulom
> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 1:09 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: [computer-go] Computer Olympiad registration reminder: 11 days
> left
> 
> Dear Go programmers,
> 
> I remind you that the deadline for early registration to the ICGA
> Computer Olympiad is June 15. After that date, registration fees will
> be
> doubled. You'll find all information on the web site of the tournament:
> http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/icga/event.php?id=37
> 
> I hope to meet you there.
> 
> 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] Tournament at US Go Congress

[David Fotland]

You need to specify how pairings will be made and how ties will be broken,
etc.  I attached the announcement from one of the US computer go tournaments
I ran at the go congress as an example.

 

Will the games be played on KGS using network connections from the contest
site, or will you provide a referee program?  If the games are played on
KGS, why do people have to drag their computers to Portland? 

 

Regards,

 

David

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Drake
Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 3:35 PM
To: Computer Go
Subject: [computer-go] Tournament at US Go Congress

 

Please find below preliminary rules for the computer Go tournament to be
held at this year's US Go Congress in Portland, Oregon. Obviously, some
details are being finalized.

 

If you can think of anything here (or not here) that could cause trouble,
please let me know ASAP. I'd like the tournament to run as smoothly as
possible.

Peter Drake

http://www.lclark.edu/~drake/

 

 

Tournament Director

Peter Drake (AND CO-DIRECTOR?)

Description

This 19x19 tournament is for computer programs only. While there have been
notable breakthroughs in recent years, computer Go remains an open problem
in artificial intelligence research.

Location

NEED LOCATION

Schedule

Round 1 1:00 PM, Sunday, August 3
Round 2 3:30 PM, Sunday, August 3
Round 3 7:00 PM, Sunday, August 3
Round 4 1:00 PM, Monday, August 4
Round 5 3:30 PM, Monday, August 4
Round 6 7:00 PM, Monday, August 4
Round 7 1:00 PM, Tuesday, August 5
Round 8 3:30 PM, Tuesday, August 5
Round 9 7:00 PM, Tuesday, August 5

Time Limits

60 minutes per player, no byo-yomi.

Rules

To give programmers as much time as possible to work out networking bugs, we
will use the same rules as the monthly KGS computer go tournaments. These
rules can be found at http://www.weddslist.com/kgs/. Of particular note are
that programs must implement GTP and that Chinese (area) scoring is used.

All hardware must be physically present in the competition room. Programmers
may bring their own hardware; we will also provide some machines (NEED
DESCRIPTION).

This is a formal tournament, meaning that people may not, for example, enter
a-modified version of a public-domain program such as GNU Go. (See the web
page above for a more detailed description.) Programmers who cannot attend
the Congress may send alternate operators. 

Prizes

Prize money has been donated by Hierarchical Systems Research Foundation and
OTHER DONORS:

1st place$500
2nd place   $300
3rd place   $150
4th place   $50





 



 1996 UNITED STATES COMPUTER GO CHAMPIONSHIP

  This announces the 1996 U.S. Computer Go Competition.

  The 1996 US Computer Go Championship will take place at the 16th
  annual US Go Congress, on July 21, 22, 23rd, at John Carrol
  University, in Cleveland, Ohio.

  This is an excellent opportunity to meet and compete with others
  interested in Computer Go.

  A plaque or trophy and title of US Computer Go Champion will be
  awarded to the winner.  There is no cash prize.  This tournament
  is not affiliated with the World Computer Go Congress, although
  the rules and format are very similar.

  In 1988 and 1989 Acer ran the US Preliminaries to the World
  Computer Go Congress at the US Go Congress.  In 1990 they changed
  their procedure to have a mail in preliminary in Taiwan.  The
  United States Computer Go Championship was organized to ensure
  that there continues to be an annual computer go competition in
  North America.  The informal discussions and contacts during the
  tournament help increase the strength of all the programs.  This
  will be the seventh United States Computer Go Championship.  Last
  year 4 programs participated.  Typically 5 to 7 programs compete.


ENTERING THE CONTEST:

  You must register for the US Go Congress to enter the Computer Go
  Competition.

  Please contact David Fotland as soon as possible if you plan to
  participate.  There is no penalty for withdrawing from
  participation later.  I prefer early notice of participation, but
  will accept new participants up to the day before the
  competition.

  For additional information on the Computer Go contest, contact:

  David Fotland
  4863 Capistrano Ave
  San Jose Ca 95129-1031
  (408)985-1236
  E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]




RULES

  Contestants must provide their own computer, which must be
  present at the contest site.  All transportation costs and risks
  will be borne by the contestant.  There will be a locked room for
  the contest, but the Congress w

RE: [computer-go] troisgro on CGOS?

[David Fotland]

Thanks.  Can you tell us how many CPUs were used?

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Olivier Teytaud
> Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2008 12:16 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] troisgro on CGOS?
> 
> > Troisgro has the highest rating on the all-time list, but has not
> been
> > active for a while.  It does not have an entry on Sensei's list.
> >
> > Is this a program, or a person?  Since the rating is so high and the
> number
> > of games is low, I suspect this is a high dan player.
> >
> > Also, it would be nice if the all-time list included the date of the
> last
> > game played, like the regular CGOS list does.
> 
> Hi; troisgro is a version of mogo, running on a cluster from Bull.
> 
> Olivier
> ___
> 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/

[computer-go] 19x19 CGOS server down

[David Fotland]

It seems to be down for a few days now.

David


___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

[computer-go] troisgro on CGOS?

[David Fotland]

Troisgro has the highest rating on the all-time list, but has not been
active for a while.  It does not have an entry on Sensei's list.

Is this a program, or a person?  Since the rating is so high and the number
of games is low, I suspect this is a high dan player.

Also, it would be nice if the all-time list included the date of the last
game played, like the regular CGOS list does.

Regards,

David


___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] 10k UCT bots

[David Fotland]

Is it true that most programs using heavy playouts use a probability
distribution on the moves to pick the next move?  I thought Mogo needed a
uniform distribution of nonlocal moves to make RAVE work well.

David

> 
> But the problem is that when you do heavy playouts you have the same
> problem except that the probabilities of the legal moves are no longer
> equal. Unless, of course, the board system keeps a list of legal moves,
> not just empty points and own eyes in playout mode have zero score
> which
> is the same as if they were illegal moves. Am I the only one doing
> this?
> 
> Jacques.
> 


___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] 10k UCT bots

[David Fotland]

When you say pure uct, what is the playout policy?  Pure random moves except
don't fill one point eyes?  What's your eye rule?

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christoph Birk
> Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 8:51 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] 10k UCT bots
> 
> 
> On May 13, 2008, at 7:25 AM, Jason House wrote:
> > I'm testing my bot on CGOS using pure UCT, no pondering, and 10,000
> > playouts per move. Can someone put up a comparable bot?
> >
> 
> I will re-start 'myCtest-10k-UCT' later today.
> 
> Christoph
> 
> ___
> 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/

[computer-go] Mogo scalability

[David Fotland]

The scalability study showed that mogo gains almost 100 rating points per
doubling of performance.

But on CGOS, there is mogo 1 CPU and mogo 4 CPU.  I would expect the 4 CPU
mogo to be 150 rating points or more higher than 1 CPU.  But it is actually
only 40 points higher.

I guess this is because in the rating study mogo was mostly playing other
mogo versions.  A the faster mogo can see everything the weaker mogo sees,
and more.

But against other programs on CGOS, there will be weaknesses common to both
fast and slow mogo, that other programs might exploit.

Is the true scalability of mogo (against a variety of programs, or against
people) less than the rating study indicates?

David


___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] The effect of the UCT-constant on Valkyria

[David Fotland]

So I'm curious then.  With simple UCT (no rave, no priors, no progressive
widening), many people said the best constant was about 0.45.  What are the
new concepts that let you avoid the constant?

Is it RAVE, because the information gathered during the search lets you
focus the search accurately without the UCT term?  Many people have said
that RAVE has no benefit for them.

Do most of the strongest programs use RAVE?  I think from Crazystone's
papers, that it does not use RAVE.  Gnugomc does not use rave.

Is it the prior values from go knowledge, like opening books, reading
tactics before the search etc?  Do all of the top programs have opening
books now?  I know mogo does.

Do most of the top programs read tactics before the search?  I know Aya
does.

Does it matter how prior values are used to guide the search?  I think mogo
uses prior knowledge to initialize the RAVE values.  Do other programs
include it some other way, by initializing the FPU value, or by initializing
the UCT visits and confidence, or some extra, "prior" term in the equation?

Are there other techniques (not RAVE) that people are using to get
information from the search to guide the move ordering?  I think crazystone
estimates ownership of each point and uses it to set prior values in some
way.

Regards,

David 

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Olivier Teytaud
> Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2008 3:10 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] The effect of the UCT-constant on Valkyria
> 
> > The results confirm that Valkyria still benefits from using
> confidence bounds
> > with UCT, although the effect is really small.
> 
> The standard deviation is a bit large for concluding.
> 
> I'll try to get similar numbers for mogo. For the moment
> everything leads to 0 as the best constant, but perhaps
> it will be different with larger numbers of sims/second.
> Olivier
> ___
> 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] Test position set for MC programs

[David Fotland]

My program found another odd alternative.

On 118, rather than make the seki at b1, black can play
G8, b2, g7, f7, g9, f9, h7.  It looks like this makes the upper right a
semeai with a ko, and black has a ko threat at b1, and white has no ko
threats.  For example, continue with  j7, j8, h9, j6, j5, d9, j7, b1, a1,
j6, any white move, g6

The semeai is complex enough that I can't tell if this is correct, but the
program reads it this way.

To avoid this fight, white must answer g8, then black plays b1 to make the
seki.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gunnar Farnebäck
> Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 11:58 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Test position set for MC programs
> 
> Yamato wrote:
>  > I attached the fixed version to this email. Thanks for your help.
> 
> Another correction. In 119 black has a serious weakness on the right.
> Is there any way for black to win after B B1, W C2, B C1, W H3?
> 
> /Gunnar
> ___
> 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] Test position set for MC programs

[David Fotland]

Another alternate move.  On problem 108 it seems that a2 works, although it
looks inferior.
A2, a3, g1, h1, a4, and if white cuts at b4, black captures and white has no
ko threats.
If white doesn’t answer at h1, black can live in the corner and white can’t
live on the left.

Gunnar, does this look correct?

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gunnar Farnebäck
> Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 12:20 PM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Test position set for MC programs
> 
> Yamato wrote:
>  > Gunnar Farnebäck wrote:
>   143: I don't see how A3 could win the semeai. A2 and C4 look more
>   effective.
>  >>> Typo, it was A2. C4 cannot work.
>  >> How does white defend against C4? I'm looking at B C4, W B4, B B5,
>  >> W B6, B A2 without finding a way out for white. Did I miss
> something?
>  >
>  > Oh, I see...
>  > I quoted this problem from a book, but it did not mention C4.
>  > If C4 works, it is not a good test, then I modify it a little.
>  >
>  > I attached the fixed version to this email. Thanks for your help.
> 
> One more correction. The fixed version added B1 as a correct move in
> 113, but that point is occupied.
> 
> GNU Go 3.7.12 results for the fixed version:
> 
> GNU Go 3.7.12 level 0  : 24/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 level 10 : 34/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 level 15 : 37/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, 1k   : 30/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, 10k  : 31/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, 100k : 38/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, light, 1k: 33/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, light, 10k   : 30/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, light, 100k  : 25/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, mogo, 1k : 34/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, mogo, 10k: 33/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, mogo, 100k   : 35/50
> 
> /Gunnar
> ___
> 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/

[computer-go] 19x19 server

[David Fotland]

I noticed there is not much 19x19 activity recently.  My copies of Many
Faces died and didn't notice, probably some time ago.  I restarted them
today.  If they stop again, just send me e-mail and I'll start them.  They
have a dedicated machine in the corner, so if windows update forces a
reboot, I don't notice it.

David


___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] Greedy search vs UCT

[David Fotland]

What level for gnugo 3.7.10?

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Magnus Persson
> Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 8:28 AM
> To: computer-go@computer-go.org
> Subject: [computer-go] Greedy search vs UCT
> 
> I have checked if there is a difference for Valkyria in using
> confidence bounds or just greedily search the move with the highest
> winrate. This is Valkyria 3.2.0 using 512 simulations per move against
> GnuGo 3.7.10.
> 
> UCT_K Winrate SERR
> 0 58.82.2 (greedy)
> 0.01  56.82.2
> 0.1   60.92.2
> 0.5   54.22.2
> 1 50.62.2
> 
> As you can see up to uct_k = 0.1, the winrate aginst gnugo is more or
> less constant (500 games was played for each value of uct_k) and then
> it declines.
> 
> So although 0.1 was best I cannot claim that it is better than a plain
> greedy search.
> 
> I will repeat this using 4 times as many simulations per move. The
> search  sensitivity to uct_k may depend on how deep the tree is
> searched.
> 
> -Magnus
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Test position set for MC programs

[David Fotland]

on problem 101, Many Faces likes A4, which I think also works, but I didn't
have time to check it thoroughly.  If A4 doesn't work, then Many Faces is
back to 37.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Yamato
> Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 5:21 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Test position set for MC programs
> 
> David Fotland wrote:
> >I didn't see this:
> >
> >>>148: D1 also wins?
> >> You are right. Thanks for correction.
> >
> >Many Faces played D1, so change it to 38  correct.
> 
> Did you use the fixed version?
> I corrected #148 as follows. Is it still wrong?
> 
> loadsgf sgf/mc148.sgf
> 148 reg_genmove black
> #? [B1|D1]
> 
> --
> Yamato
> ___
> 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] Test position set for MC programs

[David Fotland]

Interesting.  On your old version Many Faces played a3, and for your new
one, it plays a2 :)

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Yamato
> Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 11:34 PM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Test position set for MC programs
> 
> Gunnar Farnebäck wrote:
> > >> 143: I don't see how A3 could win the semeai. A2 and C4 look more
> > >> effective.
> > >
> > > Typo, it was A2. C4 cannot work.
> >
> >How does white defend against C4? I'm looking at B C4, W B4, B B5, W
> >B6, B A2 without finding a way out for white. Did I miss something?
> 
> Oh, I see...
> I quoted this problem from a book, but it did not mention C4.
> If C4 works, it is not a good test, then I modify it a little.
> 
> I attached the fixed version to this email. Thanks for your help.
> 
> --
> Yamato

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] Test position set for MC programs

[David Fotland]

I tested with your old version.  I'll try tomorrow with the new one


> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Yamato
> Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 5:21 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Test position set for MC programs
> 
> David Fotland wrote:
> >I didn't see this:
> >
> >>>148: D1 also wins?
> >> You are right. Thanks for correction.
> >
> >Many Faces played D1, so change it to 38  correct.
> 
> Did you use the fixed version?
> I corrected #148 as follows. Is it still wrong?
> 
> loadsgf sgf/mc148.sgf
> 148 reg_genmove black
> #? [B1|D1]
> 
> --
> Yamato
> ___
> 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] Test position set for MC programs

[David Fotland]

I didn’t see this:


>>148: D1 also wins?
> You are right. Thanks for correction.

Many Faces played D1, so change it to 38  correct.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gunnar Farnebäck
> Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 12:20 PM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Test position set for MC programs
> 
> Yamato wrote:
>  > Gunnar Farnebäck wrote:
>   143: I don't see how A3 could win the semeai. A2 and C4 look more
>   effective.
>  >>> Typo, it was A2. C4 cannot work.
>  >> How does white defend against C4? I'm looking at B C4, W B4, B B5,
>  >> W B6, B A2 without finding a way out for white. Did I miss
> something?
>  >
>  > Oh, I see...
>  > I quoted this problem from a book, but it did not mention C4.
>  > If C4 works, it is not a good test, then I modify it a little.
>  >
>  > I attached the fixed version to this email. Thanks for your help.
> 
> One more correction. The fixed version added B1 as a correct move in
> 113, but that point is occupied.
> 
> GNU Go 3.7.12 results for the fixed version:
> 
> GNU Go 3.7.12 level 0  : 24/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 level 10 : 34/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 level 15 : 37/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, 1k   : 30/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, 10k  : 31/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, 100k : 38/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, light, 1k: 33/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, light, 10k   : 30/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, light, 100k  : 25/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, mogo, 1k : 34/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, mogo, 10k: 33/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, mogo, 100k   : 35/50
> 
> /Gunnar
> ___
> 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] Test position set for MC programs

[David Fotland]

Traditional Many Faces (my current experimental version) gets 37 right.  I
gave it about 10 seconds on each problem.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Yamato
> Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 7:42 PM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Test position set for MC programs
> 
> Thanks Gian-Carlo, Gunnar.
> 
> Current list of results.
> 
> GNU Go 3.7.12 level 0  : 24/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 level 10 : 34/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 level 15 : 37/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, 1k   : 30/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, 10k  : 31/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, 100k : 38/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, light, 1k: 33/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, light, 10k   : 30/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, light, 100k  : 25/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, mogo, 1k : 34/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, mogo, 10k: 33/50
> GNU Go 3.7.12 mc, mogo, 100k   : 35/50
> Leela 0.3.14, 1k   : 19/50
> Leela 0.3.14, 10k  : 28/50
> Leela 0.3.14, 100k : 36/50
> Zen 1.5, 1k: 19/50
> Zen 1.5, 10k   : 22/50
> Zen 1.5, 100k  : 24/50
> 
> Leela seems to have good scalability. 36/50 passes is fine.
> The results of GNU Go are a bit irregular because of its hybrid
> strategy. If GNU Go could run on the MC only mode, it might be more
> interesting, I guess.
> 
> 
> Gunnar Farnebäck wrote:
> >One more correction. The fixed version added B1 as a correct move in
> >113, but that point is occupied.
> 
> My mistake. There will be no effect on the results, anyway.
> 
> --
> Yamato
> ___
> 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] My experience with Linux

[David Fotland]

Does Linux have a decent development environment yet?  After using Visual
studio, it would be a horrible loss of productivity  to go back to
vi/make/gdb.  Of course the linux command line tools are great when you want
them, but they are available on Windows through cygwin, so by developing on
Windows I get the best command line tools and the best IDE.

 

Since I sell software, building Linux apps is out of the question, since
Linux users will insist that  I give them my work for free.

 

David

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jim O'Flaherty,
Jr.
Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 8:55 AM
To: computer-go
Subject: Re: [computer-go] My experience with Linux

 

I'll second both the original poster (his troubles with Linux mirrored mine)
and the reply (I was completely enthralled with Ubuntu...WOW!).

Jim

- Original Message 
From: Álvaro Begué <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: computer-go 
Sent: Wednesday, April 9, 2008 10:18:11 AM
Subject: Re: [computer-go] My experience with Linux

Get ubuntu (http://www.ubuntu.com/). You can ask them to send you a
free CD. And you should consider getting a decent Internet connection.

Álvaro.


On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 10:54 AM,  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  I got excited about the free software sometime ago and bought a copy of
> Susie Linux. But the installation always hang up at some point and can
never
> complete. I had to kiss my $20 goodbye and so much for the Linux. Recently
> my job involves embedded Linux. For whatever reason we used the Fedora
> version 4. It looks like the Windows 3.1. The newest version may be more
> modernized, which I don't have tme to fnd out. The Linux operatng system
is
> about 600 Mbyte compressed. Since we have a fast internet, it took only 40
> min. to download. After downloading we needed to find a software that can
> write ISO format on CDs. I failed to find such a software on the internet
> and ended up use the trial version of Nero. Then the Nero I installed
> highjacked my CD drive and I had to unnstall it later.  I also tried the
> 64-bit version of Linux and the installation never worked.
>
>  I begin to consder install Linux on my PC at home. With my internet
> connection speed, downloading 600 MB is just unrealistic. The other option
> is to order CD's. They cost $45 and up and I'm sure this cost will go up
> with time. So much for the free software. I keeps asking myself what will
> happen if the installation fails. I only have one computer and one
internet
> connection.
>
>  Not that I don't trust other people's opinion, but people pitched other
> things before which we never hear again.
>
>
>  DL
>
>
>
> 
> Get the MapQuest Toolbar, Maps, Traffic, Directions & More!
> ___
>  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/

 

___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] Ing Challenge

[David Fotland]

The Ing prize stopped when Mr Ing died.  He was very interested in computer
go.  His foundation still funds many go tournaments, but none for computers.

The current computer go tournaments I know of are:

European go congress (Late July)
US go congress (August, small prize this year)
Gifu Challenge in Japan (usually September or October, usually moderate
prize) - http://www.computer-go.jp/gifu2005/English/outline/index.html
Computer Olympiad (Beijing this October, usually no prize, pay to enter)
UEC Cup, Japan, first one in 2007.  I don't know much about it.

David


> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Petr Baudis
> Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 6:56 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Ing Challenge
> 
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 08:50:28PM -0700, David Fotland wrote:
> > > You are right.
> >
> > Well, I did compete for this prize about 15 times, so I hope so :)
> 
> Are there any current prized computer tournaments or does anyone know
> about Ing foundation or anyone else planning to resume the challenge?
> What was the reason that it got interrupted, lack of fast enough
> progress or simple reallocation of funds within the foundation?
> 
> --
>   Petr "Pasky" Baudis
> Whatever you can do, or dream you can, begin it.
> Boldness has genius, power, and magic in it.  -- J. W. von Goethe
> ___
> 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] Life and Death

[David Fotland]

Oops, yes you are right.  I shouldn't try to look at a position when I'm
half asleep.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthew Woodcraft
> Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 12:34 PM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Life and Death
> 
> David Fotland wrote:
> > I just looked at this position and it looks like a win for black in
> the
> > first position.  Many Faces evaluates it as a win for black, and
> plays c1 to
> > save the lower left black group with almost no thinking time.
> 
> > Mogo is correct because the lower left black group is not dead.
> 
> Doesn't B3 kill in response to C1?
> 
> -M-
> ___
> 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] Life and Death

[David Fotland]

I just looked at this position and it looks like a win for black in the
first position.  Many Faces evaluates it as a win for black, and plays c1 to
save the lower left black group with almost no thinking time.

Mogo is correct because the lower left black group is not dead.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthew Woodcraft
> Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2008 11:49 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: [computer-go] Life and Death
> 
> I've included two 13x13 positions below. In both positions it is
> Black's
> move.
> 
> The first position is simplified from a real game. Black has two
> enclosed dead groups, and White has a small but easy win.
> 
> The second position is a modified version of the first in which the
> dead
> groups are more obviously dead.
> 
> If I try MogoRelease3 playing as Black on position 2, it shows a 20%
> score and resigns either immediately or after a couple of moves.
> 
> If I try it on position 1, it shows a score of 70%+ for Black, and
> continues to play until White takes steps to remove the dead groups
> from
> the board. I've tested with up to 2^24 playouts.
> 
> I have tried increasing --collectorLimitTreeSize and --limitTreeSize
> (like bigMogo in the scalability study), but I can't set them much
> higher than the default on this machine without running out of memory.
> 
> I'd be interested to see if someone with a bigger computer can find out
> what resources it needs to judge this position well, and to see how
> other engines do.
> 
> Position 1
> 
> (;GM[1]FF[4]
> CA[UTF-8]
> SZ[13]
> HA[0]
> KM[0.5]
> AB[jb:kb][cb:cc][kc][bd:cd][jd:ld][be][he][cf:df][bg][gb:gh]
> [ig:ih][jh:kh][eg:ei][li][aj:bj][hi:hj][lk][al][ck:cl][ji:jl]
> [dm][im]
> AW[ia:ja][ib][hc:jc][db:dd][hd:id][ce:de][ie][ke:le][bf][hf:jf]
> [lf][jg:kg][mg][lh][ai:di][gi][mi][cj][ej:gj][ij][dk:fk][hk:ik]
> [dl][il][bm][fl:fm][hm]
> )
> 
> Position 2
> 
> (;GM[1]FF[4]
> CA[UTF-8]
> SZ[13]
> HA[0]
> KM[0.5]
> AB[jb:mb][cb:cc][kc][bd:cd][jd:md][be][he][cf:df][bg][gb:gh]
> [ig:ih][jh:kh][eg:ei][li][aj:bj][hi:hj][bk:ck][lk][al][cl]
> [ji:jl][im]
> AW[ia:la][ib][hc:jc][mc][db:dd][hd:id][ce:de][ie][ke:le][bf]
> [hf:jf][lf][jg:kg][mg][lh][ai:di][gi][mi][cj][ej:gj][ij][dk:fk]
> [hk:ik][dl][fl][il][bm:cm][em:fm][hm]
> )
> 
> -M-
> ___
> 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] Ing Challenge

[David Fotland]

> You are right.

Well, I did compete for this prize about 15 times, so I hope so :)

David

> 
> Christoph
> 


___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

RE: [computer-go] 9x9

[David Fotland]

The lower level prizes were given for games against Insei, but the top prize
was for play against t top professional.

http://www.smart-games.com/worldcompgo.html

I can't find any official data on-line, but the information in the page
above was copied from the paper rules at the competition.

David

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nick Wedd
> Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 9:41 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] 9x9
> 
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Christoph
> Birk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
> >
> >On Mar 26, 2008, at 12:32 AM, Olivier Teytaud wrote:
> > ... is room for improvement. But 19x19 is something else, perhaps we
> >>
> >> can have the Dan, but I'm not sure of that in spite of the gentle
> >>words of
> >> Catalin, and I'm sure the current
> >> mogo can't win against a professionnal player in 19x19 whenever we
> >> have the best cluster in the world, and whenever the professionnal
> >>player
> >> is both ill and a bit drunk :-)
> >
> >By reaching 1-dan (amateur) you would have received
> >1 M$ a few year ago from Mr. Ing.
> 
> No, the million-dollar prize was for winning a match against inseis -
> young trainee professionals, about amateur 6-dan.
> 
> Nick
> --
> Nick Wedd[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ___
> 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/