Re: [computer-go] Live broadcasting at UEC Cup
Thanks for the early report! (I was sorry not to see Fudo Go in the tournament. Were you involved with any of the other teams?) Here are the second day knockout tournament unofficial results. Any mistakes are my own. Thanks to the organizers for the live screencast! 1 KCC Igo 2 Katsunari 3 Zen 4 Shikousakugo 5 Many Faces of Go 6 Erica 7 Kiseki 8 Galileo (upset Crazy Stone, due to a Chinese/Japanese rules mismatch) 9 Crazy Stone 10 Aya 11 GOGATAKI 12 Rock 13 Nomitan 14 Kinoa Igo 15 Boon 16 Kerebos Also, several exhibition matches were held (Zen beat Crazy Stone, and MFGO beat Aya). I did not stay up for the two professional exhibition games. Ian On Nov 28, 2009, at 5:42 AM, Hideki Kato wrote: You can watch some interesting games and exhibition games on the second day of the third UEC Cup at http://jsb.cs.uec.ac.jp/~igo/eng/broadcast.html. Schedule: http://jsb.cs.uec.ac.jp/~igo/eng/schedule.html Unofficial quick results of the first day: pos program win-lose-draw 1 Zen 6-0-0 2 Nomitan 5-1-0 3 KCC Igo 5-1-0 4 Kinoa Igo 5-1-0 5 GOGATAKI 4-1-1 6 Shikosakugo 4-2-0 7 Erica 4-2-0 8 Aya 4-2-0 9 Kiseki4-2-0 10 Rock 4-2-0 11 boon 3-2-1 12 Kerberos 3-3-0 13 Galileo 3-3-0 --- cut line to the second day --- 14 Island 3-3-0 15 caren3-3-0 16 PerStone 3-3-0 17 Tombo3-3-0 18 Sango alpha 3-3-0 19 Igoppi 2-4-0 20 Boozer 2-4-0 21 Kasumi 2-4-0 22 ME_arc 2-4-0 23 Mayoigo 2-4-0 24 Martha 2-4-0 25 Njarahojara 1-5-0 26 kudok1-5-0 27 Gekishin 0-6-0 28 Sanshine 0-6-0 Solkoff and SB are omitted. Seeded programs to the second day: 1 Crazy Stone 2 Many Faces of Go 3 Katsunari The Third UEC Cup: http://jsb.cs.uec.ac.jp/~igo/eng/index.html Short random comments: Aya was unlucky, lost two games against Erica and KCC. Erica gets much stronger by implementing Remi's larger patterns; lost two games by a communication trouble and waisting time by a sleeping laptop. Zen vs. KCC was a close game. Zen uses 512 cores. Hideki -- g...@nue.ci.i.u-tokyo.ac.jp (Kato) ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [SPAM] Re: [computer-go] Live broadcasting at UEC Cup
Yes, single elimination, so only the top spot is reliable. The Crazy Stone upset definitely changed the character of the final match. Here are the main brackets (again, any mistakes are my own): KCC Igo + Aya Many Faces + boon Zen + Kerberos Erica + Kinoa Igo Katsunari + rock Kiseki + nomitan Shikousakugo + GOGATAKI Galileo + Crazy Stone KCC Igo + Many Faces Zen + Erica Katsunari + Kiseki Shikousakugo + Galileo KCC Igo + Zen Katsunari + Shikousakugo KCC Igo + Katsunari KCC Igo has apparently retooled their engine to keep up with the latest Monte Carlo techniques. They were ready to compete last spring, but were denied entry to the Computer Olympiad. It is rumored that Go+ + is being overhauled; I look forward to seeing it compete again after a seven year hiatus. Ian On Nov 29, 2009, at 10:23 AM, David Fotland wrote: I think it was a single elimination, not a swiss tournament, and I think many of the strong programs were in the same bracket. I think Many Faces lost to KCC in an early round and wasn’t paired against the other strong programs. We’ll have to wait for the full results to check. David From: computer-go-boun...@computer-go.org [mailto:computer-go- boun...@computer-go.org] On Behalf Of Olivier Teytaud Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 10:18 AM To: computer-go Subject: Re: [SPAM] Re: [computer-go] Live broadcasting at UEC Cup Wow! This is quite surprising to me: 1 KCC Igo 2 Katsunari 3 Zen 4 Shikousakugo 5 Many Faces of Go 6 Erica 7 Kiseki 8 Galileo (upset Crazy Stone, due to a Chinese/Japanese rules mismatch) 9 Crazy Stone 10 Aya There are so many programs stronger than Zen, ManyFaces, CrazyStone and Aya ? There was, as sometimes in the past, a trouble with the communication time or something like that, or there are really so many very strong bots now ? Best regards, Olivier 2009/11/29 Ian Osgood i...@quirkster.com Thanks for the early report! (I was sorry not to see Fudo Go in the tournament. Were you involved with any of the other teams?) Here are the second day knockout tournament unofficial results. Any mistakes are my own. Thanks to the organizers for the live screencast! 1 KCC Igo 2 Katsunari 3 Zen 4 Shikousakugo 5 Many Faces of Go 6 Erica 7 Kiseki 8 Galileo (upset Crazy Stone, due to a Chinese/Japanese rules mismatch) 9 Crazy Stone 10 Aya 11 GOGATAKI 12 Rock 13 Nomitan 14 Kinoa Igo 15 Boon 16 Kerebos Also, several exhibition matches were held (Zen beat Crazy Stone, and MFGO beat Aya). I did not stay up for the two professional exhibition games. Ian On Nov 28, 2009, at 5:42 AM, Hideki Kato wrote: You can watch some interesting games and exhibition games on the second day of the third UEC Cup at http://jsb.cs.uec.ac.jp/~igo/eng/broadcast.html. Schedule: http://jsb.cs.uec.ac.jp/~igo/eng/schedule.html Unofficial quick results of the first day: pos program win-lose-draw 1 Zen 6-0-0 2 Nomitan 5-1-0 3 KCC Igo 5-1-0 4 Kinoa Igo 5-1-0 5 GOGATAKI 4-1-1 6 Shikosakugo 4-2-0 7 Erica 4-2-0 8 Aya 4-2-0 9 Kiseki4-2-0 10 Rock 4-2-0 11 boon 3-2-1 12 Kerberos 3-3-0 13 Galileo 3-3-0 --- cut line to the second day --- 14 Island 3-3-0 15 caren3-3-0 16 PerStone 3-3-0 17 Tombo3-3-0 18 Sango alpha 3-3-0 19 Igoppi 2-4-0 20 Boozer 2-4-0 21 Kasumi 2-4-0 22 ME_arc 2-4-0 23 Mayoigo 2-4-0 24 Martha 2-4-0 25 Njarahojara 1-5-0 26 kudok1-5-0 27 Gekishin 0-6-0 28 Sanshine 0-6-0 Solkoff and SB are omitted. Seeded programs to the second day: 1 Crazy Stone 2 Many Faces of Go 3 Katsunari The Third UEC Cup: http://jsb.cs.uec.ac.jp/~igo/eng/index.html Short random comments: Aya was unlucky, lost two games against Erica and KCC. Erica gets much stronger by implementing Remi's larger patterns; lost two games by a communication trouble and waisting time by a sleeping laptop. Zen vs. KCC was a close game. Zen uses 512 cores. Hideki -- g...@nue.ci.i.u-tokyo.ac.jp (Kato) ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ -- = Olivier Teytaud (TAO-inria) olivier.teyt...@inria.fr Tel (33)169154231 / Fax (33)169156586 Equipe TAO (Inria-Futurs), LRI, UMR 8623(CNRS - Universite Paris-Sud), bat 490 Universite Paris-Sud 91405 Orsay Cedex France (one of the 56.5 % of french who did not vote for Sarkozy in 2007) ___ 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
Re: [computer-go] Ginsei-igo 10
On Oct 20, 2009, at 1:57 AM, Hideki Kato wrote: New version of ex-strongest Ginsei-igo, Gisei-igo 10 is announced to be shipped on December 28th. http://www.silverstar.co.jp/02products/gigo10/index.html (in Japanese) New Ginsei features a hybrid Monte-Carlo engine. Its price is not announced but I've found the retail and discount prices are 13,440 and 9,899 yen (w/tax), respectively at an Internet shop. http://www.murauchi.com/MCJ-front-web/CoD/011133148/forwardKey%5B0%5D=cart/forwardKey%5B1%5D=wishList/forwardKey%5B2%5D=compareMyPage/forwardKey%5B3%5D=compareCatalog/forwardName%5B0%5D=COMMODITY_LIST/forwardName%5B1%5D=COMMODITY_LIST/forwardName%5B2%5D=COMMODITY_LIST/forwardName%5B3%5D=COMMODITY_LIST/ (in Japanese) Cf. The prices of Tencho-no-igo (Zenith/Zen) are 13,440 and 9,138 yen respectively at the same shop. Hideki -- g...@nue.ci.i.u-tokyo.ac.jp (Kato) Interesting! Do you know whether this is a development of the KCC Igo engine by the same team? Or have they given up and replaced their classical engine entirely? Any plans for translated versions for the international market? A political question: if it is the same team, regardless of engine, would it still be blacklisted from tournaments? Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] MCTS, 19x19, hitting a wall?
On Jun 10, 2009, at 12:44 PM, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: steve uurtamo wrote: But here is someting interesting: In the case of computer chess it has been estimated that the progress in software has been roughly the same as the progress in hardware. Modern chess programs are truly amazing, and not just a result of faster hardware. There is no reason to think that this won't be true of computer go. This makes me wonder... so how slow (and RAM starved) of a computer could you use and still get grandmaster level chess play? In other words, how far back could we go in time if we had today's software and expect a computer to play chess as well as humans? Assuming something like Rybka 3 is 3100 human-ELO on a 1 x 3Ghz Core 2: 3100 - 2500 = 600. Assuming 70 ELO for a doubling: 8.5 doublings 3Ghz/(2^8.5) = 8Mhz Core2. A Core 2 is a pretty nice CPU, so let's assume we lose a factor of 2 with a more ancient design: 16Mhz ARM or MIPS Very roughly, maybe an order of magnitude wrong. -- GCP We have evidence against going this low: Rybka and several other modern engines were ported to the dedicated computers Resurrection (203 MHz StrongArm) and Revelation (500 MHz XScale). Rybka's rating in the SSDF pool on these platforms are 2497 and 2634, respectively. Fruit 2.3.1 on a handheld 400MHz Xscale attained 2656 SSDF, and will probably soon be surpassed by Pocket Fritz 3 (HIARCS) and Glaurung on the same platform. Prior to these systems, the strongest dedicated computer was considered to be the TASC R40, which ran on a 40MHz ARM and attained a rating of about 2350 in this same pool. http://ssdf.bosjo.net/list.htm To conclude, it appears that 500 MHz (embedded: poor cache performance) with little memory for transposition tables is the lowest you can go, while still staying at grandmaster level. Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Go + code + environment
On May 23, 2009, at 3:17 AM, Joshua Shriver wrote: I know with the Chess community, it's looked down upon to use others code w/ respect to competing in tournaments. I'm curious, how is it with Go? Even more so. A decade ago, a couple of North Korean programs were alleged to have been plagiarized from the successful Chinese program Handtalk. The stigma was so strong that a decade later one of the programs, KCC Igo, was refused entry to the 2008 Computer Olympiad. From my understanding, many projects are inter-linked, and even some of the highest programs are derivatives of other engines. In the chess world that would be considered a clone and instantly banned and looked down upon. Perhaps I'm mistaken in my reading, but isn't Mogo a clusterized and highly tuned version of gnugo? Things like that made me want to make this post. As I find the Go programming community more open to sharing ideas and code than my chess world counter part. You are thinking of the cluster research program SlugGo. That developer and the GNU Go team have the friendly agreement not to both compete in the same tournament at the same time. GNU Go only participated in the 2008 US computer Go championship when SlugGo could not get its new cluster working in time to participate. MoGo itself was inspired by French compatriot Crazy Stone. Both of these programs are academic research projects which publish their research (though they don't share code as far as I know). The field of Computer Go owes them and the Indigo team a great debt for publishing their Monte Carlo tree search results. Early Go programmers Bruce Wilcox, David Fotland, and Mark Boon were also very generous to explain the internals of their programs in great detail. Will gladly stand corrected w/ Mogo if i'm wrong. Though curious to hear everyones input. -Josh ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Go + code + environment
On May 23, 2009, at 8:21 AM, Michael Williams wrote: MoGo was inspired by Crazy Stone? I've never heard that before. From Sensei's Library: Warm thanks to Rémi Coulom who participated in Yizao's internship. MoGo's early development benefited a lot from his sharing the experience of programming CrazyStone. ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
[computer-go] Computer Olympiad: where is GNU Go?
The Olympiad currently has only seven entrants in the Go tournament. Would anyone care to enter GNU Go to even out lineup? Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Fuego Binary for Intel Mac
On May 8, 2009, at 5:20 PM, Marco Scheurer wrote: On May 8, 2009, at 10:20 PM, Ian Osgood wrote: There is no interface for editing the name (Anonymous), so quit and edit the prefs by hand. In fact there is: double click on the name in the table in the Players preference. marco Marco Scheurer Sen:te, Lausanne, Switzerland http://www.sente.ch Thank you. I had only tried a single click while an item was selected, like renaming files in the Finder. Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Fuego Binary for Intel Mac
On May 8, 2009, at 11:57 AM, Ech Naton wrote: Hello I made a binary of Fuego 0.3.2 for Intel Mac. It is build on OS X 10.4. So I don't know if it runs also under 10.5. But since it is not that easy to build, maybe somebody is interested in a ready executable. Simply unzip the files in a directory and call fuego032 from your GTP client. There is no need for library installation or root rights. Regards Patrick fuego.zip Thank you very much! Works fine under Sente Goban (tested on OS X 10.4). 1. Preferences Players New Player Program (GTP) Give path to fuego032, and any arguments for setting number of threads and such. (Can you set any of the GTP settings from the command line?) (You can create multiple instances with different settings if you wish.) There is no interface for editing the name (Anonymous), so quit and edit the prefs by hand. a. quit and edit ~/Library/Preferences/ch.sente.Goban.plist b. edit Players (class GobanGTPPlayer) object name c. change string to Fuego 0.3.2 d. save and restart Goban 2. New Info Rules and Players You can change the players at the bottom as well as the board size, handicap, and komi. (Rules are stuck on Japanese and time controls are disabled for some reason) These settings are retained for subsequent games. Ian___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] COGS bug in Ko detection?
On Apr 14, 2009, at 11:06 AM, Robert Jasiek wrote: To offer an on-topic reason: positional superko requires less storage and execution time than situational superko. -- robert jasiek Really? Go programs already store side-to-move as part of the board state. For ko detection, you usually use a Zobrist hash, which merely gets a side-to-move hash XORed into it for situational ko, so no storage increase. Situational ko detection is actually faster, because you only need to check every other position in history instead of every position. (But honestly, it makes little difference since you are already only going to look at positions with matching stone counts.) The practical answer for program authors is to support both of these ko rulesets, since they are both widely used in the Go world. ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] My ongoing CGoTournament - actual results
Nice job! I have updated my list of strongest programs to match. (Assumes all MCTS programs are stronger than all classical programs.) http://senseis.xmp.net/?GoPlayingPrograms%2FDiscussion#toc8 The remaining strong classical programs you're missing are KCC Igo (Silver Star), Haruka, and Go Intellect (Goddess on Windows). I think Wulu is also still available for purchase. Ian On Mar 31, 2009, at 7:30 PM, Stefan Mertin wrote: More than ten thousand games 19x19 Go are played in my computer Go Tournament - time to again publish some results! Please have a look at my newly created site for results and more informations: www.igosoft.com All these games are played on my home PC (Windows - Intel Pentium IV - 2.6 GHz). Until now I focussed on the classical programs, so GOEMATE 2001 from Zhen Zhixing and GO++ 7.0 from Michael Reiss are still the top engines here. Recently I added a newer version of Peter Woitke´s program SUZIE for 19x19. This engine works with pure alpha-beta tree-search and a position evaluation function like most of the classical chess engines do and I think it is most remarkable how much SUZIE improved in last years without use of MonteCarlo TreeSearch techniques. SUZIE 0.40 finished third and seems to be nearly as strong as the older version of Go++ 5.0. Then FUNGO 2000 proved to be only a little bit stronger than the tested GNUGO versions 3.7.10 and 3.7.11 but weaker than GNUGO 3.7.11 on level 15. I now see that GnuGo v3.8 is released and plan to replay most of the games with this newer version as soon as possible. But first I finally want to let play the 2008 Computer Go Champion, MANYFACES v12 by David Fotland. This program offers two different engines and I want to include both, the classical but also improved engine, level 4 Kyu, still with alphabeta-TS, to replace MANYFACES 11, and the even much stronger MC-TS engine, level 2 Kyu. Than I really would be glad if I could invite more of the actual MC programs out there like MOGO, CRAZYSTONE, ZEN, FUEGO (possibly I could use the windows- executable of v0.32,SVN799 compiled by Ben Lambrechts!?), LEELA, ... and more to participate! All kinds of questions, comments or suggestions are most welcome and highly appreciated! Stefan ___ 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] Rumors on next Computer-Olympiad
On Dec 20, 2008, at 2:31 AM, Rémi Coulom wrote: Ingo Althöfer wrote: PS: Are there any gentlewomen programmers around in computer go ? Yumiko Suzuki participated in the First UEC Cup with Bell. Rémi Also 2000 champion Wulu had Prof. Chen's daughter on the team, didn't it? Whatever happened to that effort? Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
[computer-go] Handtalk's Chen Zhixing
The following was posted on Sensei's Library: Prof. Chen passed away at Oct 12, 2008, at the age of 77. Can anyone confirm or deny? Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
[computer-go] MC programs vs. top commercial programs?
Now that Leela and Many Faces v12 are available for any Windows user to purchase and run (and Fuego is free to tinker with), has anyone tried them against the old guard of commercial programs? KCC Igo, Haruka, Go++, and HandTalk haven't competed in a while so it is hard to tell how much better MC is than the previous state of the art. (For that matter, it isn't a foregone conclusion that they are better; GNU Go won the 2008 US computer go tournament against a field MC programs.) Alternatively, I wonder whether Hiroshi Yamashita has tested his stronger AyaMC against his stable of commercial programs (as he previously did in 2007 using GNU Go). ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Git, any other ideas?
Mark, The usual questions: what versions of things were you trying, config logs, what responses you got from the support mailing lists and IRC, etc. Did you look at these pages for advice? * http://www.jgit.org/ * http://git.or.cz/gitwiki/EclipsePlugin Our shop does cross platform Eclipse Java development using git at the command line, and we have been thinking of using Egit on Windows to avoid some file permission problems (unlike other platforms, Eclipse on Windows holds some files open exclusively so that Cygwin git can't manipulate the working copy reliably), so I'm interested in your experience. Ian On Oct 24, 2008, at 11:03 AM, Mark Boon wrote: Due to several recommendations from this list I decided to take a look at git. After wasting a few hours trying to get the Eclipse plugin to work I decided to give up. I might give it a look again when it comes with a reliable installer / update-link. Any other ideas? I can keep using Subversion and mirror it. But then traffic can only go one way... Mark ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Git, any other ideas?
On Oct 24, 2008, at 1:58 PM, Mark Boon wrote: Well, the reason for moving off Subversion (potentially) was that I found it too slow to have my repository online. I can use mirroring, which may be the best option for now, but if possible I'd prefer it to be set up so that others can make changes as well. The only Eclipse plugin I found for git (and I did look around) seems to be an abandoned project. So that doesn't instill any confidence at all that the situation will improve any time soon. ??? The last commits to egit were just two days ago: http://www.jgit.org/cgi-bin/gitweb/gitweb.cgi?p=EGIT.git;a=summary Plugin update site for Update Manager: http://www.jgit.org/update-site It does seem to require you to have installed the git command line tools first (either Cygwin or MSYS). I feel I have better things to do with my scarce time than figuring out complicated install procedures, so if I don't find anything easy to replace Subversion I'll stick to that. Mark I cannot argue with this. I too have found git to have a steep learning curve. Like others, I believe it has been worth it. Also, it is rather young compared to CVS and Subversion, and it is still coming to maturity. Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] From zero to playing on CGOS in 10 minutes
On Oct 22, 2008, at 11:16 AM, Mark Boon wrote: I'm getting close to something I'd like to show people and get feedback. One thing to decide is how to make it public. Previously I used dev.java.net to host my project. But I stopped using it because I had a very slow internet connection and I was getting annoyed with the time it took to communicate with Subversion on the remote host. At the moment I have a bit more decent internet connection, but it's still not fast. Nor reliable. So ideally I'd like to keep the stuff in my local repository. Like a two-step process. I can store versions locally and when I want I can migrate or merge it with the one online. I know ClearCase is ideal for this kind of settup. But too expensive and I doubt there's an online service that supports it. Does anyone know if something like this is possible to setup with Subversion? anyone having experience with something like this? I have been using git for all of my new projects. It is distributed; users get a clone of the repository. Very fast and proven. Many hosting alternatives are listed here: http://git.or.cz/gitwiki/ GitHosting and it is possible to set up your own hosting if you have a public server. Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] programming languages
On Oct 10, 2008, at 2:10 PM, Stuart A. Yeates wrote: On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 10:05 AM, terry mcintyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I like the idea of a contest to determine the best ways to implement a particular problem ( generating light playouts ) in various languages. The Language Shootout is probably not the best forum, since they require the same algorithm, which defeats the purpose of comparing languages which tend to do different things well by design; a good programmer/advocate would play to the strengths of each language. The Language shootout has a class of contests which do not require the same algorithm, i.e. http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32q/benchmark.php? test=meteorlang=all cheers stuart The Alioth site is centrally administrated, so the bureaucracy to add a task is formidable. On the other hand, they've just added a multicore test platform and already have a performance measuring framework. Might I suggest again the Rosetta Code wiki at http:// www.rosettacode.org/? Anyone can contribute at any time, since it's uses MediaWiki, like Wikipedia. They have active participants for many compiled languages, and have just been discussing adding a game category. I would especially like to see what the J and Haskell folks make of this task. For a larger project like this, they recommend making a single task page with a sub page for each language (like RCBF). Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] programming languages
On Oct 9, 2008, at 5:52 AM, Don Dailey wrote: On Thu, 2008-10-09 at 19:05 +0900, Darren Cook wrote: The http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/ site, ... If we, as a community, could come up with a sufficiently detailed description of light playouts algorithm (see the current Light simulation : Characteristic values thread), there is no reason that this algorithm couldn't join them. This is an excellent idea. Go for it! I suspect that detailing the algorithm sufficiently for non-go players to implement may be surprising challenging. I think as long as you supply a reference C (or C++ or java) implementation it is okay. You cannot beat working code for a tech spec :-). My concern is that to include all the rules of go, including capture logic, you need a few hundred lines of code, which might put some people off. You can code up a basic MC player in less than a day. I don't think non-go programmers are very likely to provide an implementation anyway but they are free to. We can provide support for anyone that wants to and we can advertise this. A real simple reference implementation should be provided. It should not be written to be fast, but real clear and easy to understand at a glance and well commented. - Don Rosetta Code (http://www.rosettacode.org/) would welcome this kind of language comparison task. Ian ___ 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 !
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/
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/
Re: [computer-go] 2008 Olympiad
On Aug 21, 2008, at 12:48 AM, Rémi Coulom wrote: Ian Osgood wrote: Thanks! I see that KCC Paduk is no longer on the list of participants for 2008. Have they withdrawn? Ian Their registration was rejected because of past problems with [this] program in other computer Go tournaments (these are the words of David Levy). The ICGA will make an official statement later. I hope it will give to Chen Zhixing some incentive to participate. He has registered to the TaiZhou tournament, but not to the Olympiad. So have Gostar and some other Chinese programs. That clash between TaiZhou and the Olympiad is very unfortunate. I have noticed that the Olympiad was renamed 13th International Computer Games Championship. I suppose they cannot use Olympiad for legal reasons. Rémi I no longer see CrazyStone nor GoLois in the list of participants for 19x19. I do hope Chen Zhixing decides to enter HandTalk. Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Explanations of new heurestics to Wiki
On Sep 11, 2008, at 10:15 AM, Petri Pitkänen wrote: Cheers, Senseis has a explanation of UCT. But if someone could add explanations to RAVE, AMAF, other non UCT-MCTS tecniques that woudl be graet. Preferably someone who understands those, that one rules me out. I think I understand about RAVE though. This would help people joining the list at least. Petri Have you seen http://senseis.xmp.net/?MonteCarloTreeSearch ? I started that page to explain all the various monte carlo algorithms and heuristics. Feel free to expand it. Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Lockless hash table and other parallel search ideas
On Sep 10, 2008, at 8:27 AM, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: Note that computer-go has one big advantage over computer-chess; because there is little sales possible to achieve, there is little money at stake, that gives the advantage that the programmers at least communicate with each other in a forum like this and at tournaments. In computerchess it is very difficult to find talkative persons. I'm not sure this statement is true. It has been estimated that the overall market for the amateur level Go programs has been around 5-10 million dollars. I imagine that this market will only expand as the programs become stronger, China enters the software marketplace, and Go becomes more popular worldwide. What would you estimate the worldwide chess program market to be? I agree that the Go community is refreshingly open about their techniques. Even commercial authors like Bruce Wilcox and David Fotland wrote extensively about their programs' internals. In chess, the authors have their trade secrets which they keep as long as they can make sales. The one blight on the computer Go community was the North Korean KCC Igo plagiarism scandal. Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] 2008 Olympiad
On Aug 20, 2008, at 6:34 AM, Rémi Coulom wrote: Ian Osgood wrote: I haven't been able to access the ICGA tournament site for over a week. Anyone know anything about it? Ian The website is back now: http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/icga/ Sorry for the interruption. Rémi Thanks! I see that KCC Paduk is no longer on the list of participants for 2008. Have they withdrawn? Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
[computer-go] http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/icga/ site down?
I haven't been able to access the ICGA tournament site for over a week. Anyone know anything about it? Ian ___ 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?
On Aug 12, 2008, at 5:25 AM, Don Dailey wrote: On Tue, 2008-08-12 at 08:43 +0200, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: I don't like opening books. They are a liability when the rest of the program is still improving so quickly. I had one that worked effectively, but had to be redone if the program improved substantially, so it was a program. I essentially deep- search each new position encountered. So each game played presented a new book position to learn which I did off-line. It even had variety - I didn't want it too predictable so I deep searched N times, and used the moves in the same ratio they were chosen. Usually only 1 or 2 moves get played. 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. Self-learned books were also abandoned in chess. Hand tuned books are labor intensive, often requiring a separate team member to create them, but the best chess programs all have them. Ian ___ 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?
On Aug 12, 2008, at 11:18 AM, steve uurtamo wrote: On 8/12/08, Ian Osgood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 12, 2008, at 5:25 AM, Don Dailey wrote: On Tue, 2008-08-12 at 08:43 +0200, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: I don't like opening books. They are a liability when the rest of the program is still improving so quickly. I had one that worked effectively, but had to be redone if the program improved substantially, so it was a program. I essentially deep- search each new position encountered. So each game played presented a new book position to learn which I did off-line. It even had variety - I didn't want it too predictable so I deep searched N times, and used the moves in the same ratio they were chosen. Usually only 1 or 2 moves get played. 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. Self-learned books were also abandoned in chess. Hand tuned books are labor intensive, often requiring a separate team member to create them, but the best chess programs all have them. Ian what happens when the opponent deviates from joseki? knowing how to punish joseki mistakes can be very, very tricky. also knowing which joseki to use where is very, very sophisticated. the wrong joseki can be worse globally than a non-joseki move. s. The punishing moves, if tricky, would naturally be added to the library. I was hoping that the global search would take care of choosing the appropriate semeais/josekis for the overall board situation. I realize that this is not as easy to implement as the canned opening moves of a chess program, but the value of the system is the same: better opening play and more thinking time for the remaining moves. 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 ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
[computer-go] 3x3 patterns
How are folks constructing their 3x3 pattern databases? How are they being used? If they are being used for playout biases, then I don't think examining games is the right way to gather data. 90% of the moves considered in a game of Go are unplayed; the tactical analysis that is required to determine whether the moves actually played are sound. This seems to be what the playouts represent. 3x3 is all about contact, which mostly is about fighting, tesuji, joseki, semeais, life-and-death, connectivity, yose, and finalizing boundaries. So it seems to me that 3x3 patterns should bias sente and urgent moves (hane, extend, shoulder hit, attach, block, peep, push, connect, turn, ko, ladders) and prevent local mistakes (filling eyes, bad shape). My own studies show that the empty 3x3 pattern is by far the most used (and I suspect crucial), followed by hane, attach, block, shoulder, and extend. The probability of each connection and blocking pattern with many stones is low, because there are more possible stone combinations that are essentially the same situation; the likelyhood of any one situation showing up in a game is small. Do folks have sparser pattern databases for empty space move selection in playouts (one point jump, keima, two point jump, corner enclosures, loose connections, wall extensions, etc)? Have you seen other surprising biases in your generated 3x3 pattern databases? Also, has anyone used the small diamond pattern instead of 3x3 patterns? This is gives you one-point jumps, kos, and more sensitivity to edge effects. Ian Terms (for a move in the center by O, '?' means maybe add one O): . ... .. .. small diamond pattern ... . OX. . . hane ??? .X. ? . attach ?.. XX? O ? block ??? X.. . . shoulder ??? XO. XOX . . . . extend ... ... OX. O . turn ?.. ___ 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!
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/
Re: [computer-go] mogo beats pro!
On Aug 9, 2008, at 4:16 AM, terry mcintyre wrote: - Original Message I still have this theory that when the level of the program is in the high-dan reaches, it can take proper advantage of an opening book. Alas, it may be a few years before enough processoring power is routinely available to test this hypothesis. I know that we duffers can always ruin a perfectly good joseki just as soon as we leave the memorized sequence. Steve: why would this be the case? and where would the book come from? A thousand years of Go experience? There are many good books on fuseki and joseki. The challenge is encoding that knowledge flexibly and using the information appropriately. Compared to earlier programs, this is one area where the MC programs have taken a step backwards (or rather, a step toward the center). my thinking is that unless mogo created the book itself, playing games like these, against opponents like these, at time controls like this one, then it couldn't possibly be helpful. and even then it might not be helpful. There is an obvious need for adding features to Go programs to make them play more like humans. The public won't buy programs that play too strangely, even if they are objectively stronger. The challenges to MC programs are to: 1. Play more normal looking fuseki. 2. Play joseki moves when available, and use appropriate joseki for the current board situation. 3. Correct seki detection and evaluation. 4. Some sort of sliding komi so programs still play reasonably when far ahead or far behind. 4. Toward the endgame, switch to greedier evaluations that maximize points. 6. Pass instead of filling in territory when all dame are filled. As far as we could see, Mogo was essentially re-creating book knowledge the hard way - using millions of playouts times many seconds to do so. The opening is the same in every game: you start with an empty board or a given number of handicap stones; why spend minutes figuring out the best first move, instead of precalculating that information? As for where it would come from, observation of thousands of pro games would reveal what they do in a variety of standard sequences. This information is not useful if the program cannot play at that level -- lower-level players often botch the followup to joseki, or choose the wrong joseki for the given whole- board situation. But a program which uses joseki to guide search could optimize search. There have already been programs that have used pro game databases for opening moves. Howard Landman's Poka springs to mind. You can reliably say that in certain situations, when you play move A, even the strongest pro is very likely to respond with one of a handful of plays; if this knowledge is part of the search strategy, the search is much more efficient. If you choose to play some other move, it needs to be demonstrably better than the standard replies. A more efficient opening would enable more time to be spent on the complex middle-game situations. Indeed. That is especially beneficial for scalable search algorithms. For example, Orego had a simplistic yet effective fuseki: try to play on all the star points for the first nine moves. That saved quite a lot of time and still obtained a reasonable looking opening. Ian ___ 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
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/
Re: [computer-go] 2008 World 9x9 Computer Go Championship in Taiwan
On Jul 2, 2008, at 1:29 PM, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: Ian Osgood wrote: By contrast, the ICGA Go events never get top candidate program participation, and before this year have had smaller turnouts than the chess event. Since the expiration of the Ing Prize, the last event of any kind which had such participation was the 2003 Gifu Challenge (KCC Igo, Haruka, Go++, Goemate, Many Faces, GNU Go, Go Intellect, Aya, Katsunari). The size of this year's event is encouraging, but where are Go++, Haruka, HandTalk, and GNU Go? And what ever happened to Wulu and GoAhead? This depends on what you consider top candidate program. I see no reason why your list Go++, Haruka, HandTalk, and GNU Go should be accurate, and I strongly suspect anyone who has a change of winning the world, err, olympiad title is already registered. -- GCP At one time, each of these programs has won computer Go events and been considered a top contender, and then (except for GNU Go) bowed out of close public competition. It would be an interesting benchmark to show the progress of modern MC programs if these past-champions competed. It would at least give us an answer to the question Are the new MC programs stronger than [Go++, Haruka, HandTalk]? It would be especially interesting if GNU Go competed, since it has been a long-term representative of the classical pattern-matching Go engine, as well as now having an MC variant suitable for 9x9 play. I do agree that the 2008 ICGA competition is shaping up to be the strongest computer Go championship the world has seen since the end of the Ing Prize. Ian ___ 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
On Jul 2, 2008, at 10:31 AM, Zach Wegner wrote: On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 4:33 PM, Erik van der Werf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's a pretty good deal!!! http://64.68.157.89/forum/viewtopic.php? topic_view=threadsp=193819t=21591 Why isn't there any sponsoring like this for the other tournaments? Erik They pretty much have to. The ICGA has achieved a rather lousy reputation in the chess community, and very few participants are showing up nowadays (11 on the list now). Compare that to the online tournaments, which always have around 30 or more participants. Personally I'd like to go and meet some other programmers, but there are so few. And even after the subsidies it would still be very expensive... In my opinion, the size of the ICGA World Computer Chess Championship event is irrelevant. More importantly, it has the prestige to consistently draw the top candidate programs. This year, past champions Rybka, Junior, Shredder, and HIARCS will be competing for the title. (The author of Zappa no longer develops his program, so I'm not surprised he dropped out. I don't know why Fritz never attends. Hydra would also be an interesting participant as one of the last custom chess supercomputers.) By contrast, the ICGA Go events never get top candidate program participation, and before this year have had smaller turnouts than the chess event. Since the expiration of the Ing Prize, the last event of any kind which had such participation was the 2003 Gifu Challenge (KCC Igo, Haruka, Go++, Goemate, Many Faces, GNU Go, Go Intellect, Aya, Katsunari). The size of this year's event is encouraging, but where are Go++, Haruka, HandTalk, and GNU Go? And what ever happened to Wulu and GoAhead? Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Is MC-UCT really scalable against humans?
On Jan 22, 2008, at 2:08 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MoGo plays unconventional moves only in the first 10 moves or so. That is it plays an unconventional openning. An unconventional opening in Go is actaully something that is celebrated for ... DL If this is a concern, someone should add a fuseki database to a UCT program to see if it improves play. I know that Howard Landman had a very complete fuseki DB in his program Poka. I also wonder how Monte Carlo evaluations would work married to other depth-first searches, like Proof-Number. Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
[computer-go] http://www.computer-go.info/ expired
Is it just me, or did the http://www.computer-go.info/ site just expire? Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
[computer-go] Generative Code Specialisation for High-Performance Monte Carlo Simulations
This might be of interest given the recent interest in Go programming in functional languages (Lisp). http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/2533 ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Re: A thought about ratings.
On Dec 10, 2007, at 11:53 AM, Edward de Grijs wrote: Nobody really believes ratings are 100% right on the money accurate. But it's silly not to use the most correct method possible. Ratings are a very useful approximation to reality and you might as well get as close to that reality as you can. - Don But then we have to take the amount of computing power (nr of cpu and speed of cpu's) into account. This has a major influence on UCT/MC programs. Otherwise we only test the package of progam+computer together and not the progam alone. Speed differences of more then 10 exists in the rating pool... --Edward In the many chess computer rating lists, the entities in the list are determined by: 1) Program, including version and settings (e.g. standard vs. hyper- modern) 2) Platform, including processor, clock speed, number of cores, and amount of memory devoted to transposition tables Sometimes the entities are even distinguished by which opening book or endgame database is in use. Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
[computer-go] Great day for CrazyStone!
According to computer-go.info, today CrazyStone won both sections of the KGS tournament (against strong opposition this month) and the UEC Cup in Japan. Well done, Rémi! ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Computer Go tournaments - various
On Nov 27, 2007, at 4:24 AM, Nick Wedd wrote: FUTURE TOURNAMENTS I learned today about the UEC Cup ( http://jsb.cs.uec.ac.jp/~igo/ eng/ ), a major Computer Go event that is now less than a week away. I wish I had known about it sooner, I would have listed it at http://www.computer-go.info/events/future.html, and maybe rescheduled this Sunday's KGS bot tournament. How do people find out about these things? I am not aware that the UEC Cup has been mentioned on this mailing list. Nick -- Nick Wedd[EMAIL PROTECTED] Checking the participants, I see that MoGo and CrazyStone were specifically invited. Also playing is a version of GNU Go (presumably), as well as veterans Aya and Katsunari, and two dozen others. What boggles my mind is the lack of participation in these events from commercial players like KCC Igo, Haruka, Go4++, Handtalk, and Many Faces. Why does the computer Go market not demand the prestige of competing for titles, as has always been the case for computer chess? It is as if the World Computer Chess Championship only had the participation of amateurs and university research teams. Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Drunken sailor on payday
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Nov 22, 2007, at 1:17 PM, Stefan Nobis wrote: Benjamin Teuber [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Man, we really need a complete Common Lisp Go Framework which also has some fast low-level code to show all these C gurus its true power :) I think so, too. :) I don't want to say CL is the one and only language (for me surely it is), I only try to emphasize that C is not the only choice. -- Until the next mail..., Stefan. Folks might be interested in the Common Lisp chess program Symbolic by Steven J. Edwards (of PGN fame). From his ICC description: Symbolic is a C++/Lisp chessplaying program written by S. J. Edwards. Symbolic's C++ source is fully ANSI/POSIX compliant and portable. Symbolic includes a ChessLisp interpreter for running its Lisp code. Neither source nor object code is publically available. One day, all interesting chess programs will be written in Lisp. Bit twiddling is not a pathway to Artificial Intelligence. More information on Symbolic can be found in the Computer Chess Club archives, where Steven made regular progress reports. Ian -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin) iD8DBQFHSb77HDwFgzc3zyIRAtyAAKDtVYJwpyLbJ4BfxOmN2eb2JH9RFgCgwwW3 kE3+PFh4sYzcxvkkLRmD+4w= =/y7n -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Drunken sailor on payday
On Nov 25, 2007, at 10:29 AM, Ian Osgood wrote: Folks might be interested in the Common Lisp chess program Symbolic by Steven J. Edwards (of PGN fame). From his ICC description: Symbolic is a C++/Lisp chessplaying program written by S. J. Edwards. Symbolic's C++ source is fully ANSI/POSIX compliant and portable. Symbolic includes a ChessLisp interpreter for running its Lisp code. Neither source nor object code is publically available. One day, all interesting chess programs will be written in Lisp. Bit twiddling is not a pathway to Artificial Intelligence. More information on Symbolic can be found in the Computer Chess Club archives, where Steven made regular progress reports. Ian His most recent progress reports are on his blog: http://chessnotation.livejournal.com/ Also, this isn't strictly Common Lisp. He uses his own dialect called Chess Lisp, which contains optimized domain primitives such as bitboard operations. Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Language
On Nov 13, 2007, at 7:46 AM, Jason House wrote: On Nov 13, 2007 10:36 AM, Ian Osgood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I like Forth. I got excited about UCT around the time of the Computer Olympiad and wrote a bitmap-based 9x9 program. What is the general impression on bitmap vs. mailbox board representations for Monte Carlo readouts? I never went down the road of bitmap based go because I had not clever way to efficiently track captures. How did you get around this hurdle? I never claimed efficiency. What do you mean by track captures? You mean detect when a string loses all its liberties? That is simply when the intersection of the set of empty points with the string expanded once is the empty set. This can only happen to strings bordering a move, so I do the check there: \ liberties of a string \ liberties == neighbors empty \ b w .0 0 1 \ . w . - 1 0 1 \ . b b0 0 0 : liberties ( [s] -- [l] ) expand empty bd-top bd-and ; : capture ( s -- ) DUP empty bd-or enemy bd-xor ; \ check for liberties at each dilation for an early cutoff : ?capture ( x y -- ) 2DUP enemy bd-@ IF bbit 1 ( [s] count ) BEGIN expand empty bd-top bd-intersects? IF\ liberties? exit bdrop DROP EXIT THEN enemy bd-top bd-and bd-top bd-count TUCK = UNTIL \ no liberties: capture bd-top capture bdrop DROP ELSE 2DROP THEN ; : check-captures ( x y -- ) OVER 1+ OVER ?capture OVER 1- OVER ?capture 2DUP 1+ ?capture 1- ?capture ; Currently, my program does very little incremental storage, recalculating strings when needed. Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Language
On Nov 13, 2007, at 9:17 AM, Heikki Levanto wrote: Now that I know of MC and related techniques, it might pay off anyway to see if a bitmap machine could play reasonably fast simulations. I can see two problems remaining: A quick test to sort out all eyelike points, to get a bitmap of moves to try. And a quick way to pick a legal move, when the set of legal moves are expressed as a bitmap. I do the eye test by expanding the candidate eye until it 1) hits an enemy 2) stops growing or 3) reaches a size limit (currently 9) I then do a final check to allow filling a false eye (the candidate the only liberty of a neighboring string). Picking the random legal move (random-candidate in my code) does take some iteration and retrying, but it can be staged. 1. candidates = empty points 2. choice = random(candidate count) Find the row. 3. for candidate rows: 4. choice -= row count 5. until choice 0 Find the column. 6. for bits set in candidate column: 7. choice++ 8. until choice==0 Check if allowed. 9. if the chosen point is an eye (but not a false-eye), suicide, or ko: remove the point from the candidates, and try again at step 2 10. no moves left? pass (One thing I haven't done is And the bitmap reprsentation itself. I did my experiments with an array of 32-bit words, one for each row. Left enough room to shift left and right, and not fall off the board. But I had to loop through every row. I would expect a tighly packed bitmap ought to be faster, but how do you handle overflows when shifting up/down? -H Overflows are not a problem as long as you keep a buffer row and column at each edge of the board. Some operations upon a packed bitmap (such as dilation) may end up growing the bitmap, which must be accounted for. The complexity introduced should be made up for by the reduction in the number of rows you must iterate over for all other operations. Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Language
On Nov 13, 2007, at 11:11 AM, Don Dailey wrote: Ian Osgood wrote: On Nov 12, 2007, at 3:59 PM, Don Dailey wrote: How about forth? A lot of the high level languages we are talking about essentially get converted to forth (or I should say a forth type language.) - Don I like Forth. I got excited about UCT around the time of the Computer Olympiad and wrote a bitmap-based 9x9 program. What is the general impression on bitmap vs. mailbox board representations for Monte Carlo readouts? http://www.quirkster.com/iano/forth/fgp.html It is not yet very fast, mostly due to unoptimized code, partly due to using a direct-threaded Forth (gforth) instead of a compiled version. One nice thing about the dictionary-based memory allocation used by the UCT breadth-first search: the entire search is deallocated at once by resetting the dictionary pointer. Ian I was only half kidding about forth - it is a language I haven't really explored and at some point I want to learn it, and give it a good enough chance that I can form a well educated opinion of the language. It's my understanding that the good optimizing compilers for forth are commercial.If there were a fast free optimizing compiled forth with good documentation available, I would start experimenting with it. But I don't think there is - it seems to be a commercial language. - Don Heh. Forth is a rather fragmented language. There are some commercial (though free for personal use), highly optimized compilers such as Forth, Inc., MPE, and iForth. There are also a few open optimizing compilers for selected platforms, such as bigForth for Intel Linux and colorForth for Pentium PCs. And then there are zillions of hobby implementations for every microcontroller, microprocessor, and architecture ever created, because the base Forth model is so easy to implement. One problem is that Forth implementers all work on their own, because they can, rather than rally round a common implementation and focus the effort there (as with GCC, Python, Perl, etc). Another problem is that Forth has historically focused on compactness for factoring and embedded applications, rather than raw speed on desktop processors. Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Language
Sounds like you want to write a Go program in XSLT! Ian On Nov 13, 2007, at 3:51 PM, Don Dailey wrote: Good, I wouldn't want it without XML libraries. Is there any versions that use XML for writing code?I want to be able to use xml tags instead of parenthesis: paren /paren Then it will much more readable - which is one of the strengths of xml. - Don Benjamin Teuber wrote: On Nov 14, 2007 12:18 AM, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Common lisp? Does it have xml libraries? - Don http://www.google.de/search?q=common+lisp+xml ___ 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] XML alternatives to SGF
On Oct 23, 2007, at 9:01 AM, Stuart A. Yeates wrote: Much of the discussion in this thread has focused very narrowly on using an XML format to replace SGF, I believe that if an XML format is to take off, it should offer capabilities beyond what are possible in SGF, conversion to XML for XMLs sake is pointless. Possibilities include: * A method for presenting translated comments, i.e. the same comments in different languages, so a program can display only the appropriate ones. cheers stuart I'm surprised no one has brought up an obvious benefit of XML: well defined character encoding. A prime weakness of SGF is its unspecified character encoding. I thought that SGF is not well accepted in Asia due to this limitation. Re: coordinate normalization. This seems really trivial to me, easily something that could be incorporated as an option into the existing SGF standard. The code change would be minor. (I also presume that any proposal would retain the quirk of skipping the letter i in the horizontal coordinates?) Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] best approach forward
On Oct 11, 2007, at 11:01 AM, Rémi Coulom wrote: In case nobody noticed, Crazy Stone won a match against KCC Igo this summer, with 15 wins and 4 losses. The match was organized by Hiroshi Yamashita. The games can be found in the KGS archives. http://www.gokgs.com/gameArchives.jsp?user=kcconguiyear=2007month=7 Rémi Are you certain of the result? Two of the games I examined have scores that don't take into account removal of dead stones. (W+66.5 should be B+20, and W+48.5 looks like a 1 pt game.) This makes me wonder if some of the other losses and unfinished games (by score or time) are actually wins for KCC Igo on the board. I would certainly like to see the twenty games of this match validated, corrected, commented, and preserved for posterity. If this is valid, it is quite an achievement! I've updated my own ranking estimates accordingly: http://senseis.xmp.net/?GoPlayingPrograms%2FDiscussion#toc8 Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] best approach forward
On Oct 11, 2007, at 10:44 AM, terry mcintyre wrote: - Original Message From: Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] My point is that this probably won't happen in computer Go but it happened long ago in computer chess. - - Don Can you point us to info about comparable agency for computer chess? Who funds such an agency? Thanks! Here is a collection of agencies: four orgamnizations and five individuals. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_engine_rating_lists There is no funding as such. These are all amateur enthusiasts who have put their own money and time into the effort. David Fotland used to maintain a ranking of Go programs based on public tournament results, but it has not been maintained for a few years. The last tournament which had good representation of top programs was the 2003 Gifu Challenge. Ian___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Former Deep Blue Research working on Go
On Oct 11, 2007, at 1:49 PM, Eric Boesch wrote: On 10/11/07, David Fotland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But the only way to settle this is to do some experiments. I could certainly be wrong. If we have a mogo-many faces match on 19x19 cgos, and we also have them play for ratings against people on kgs, it would settle it. Mogobot1 and mogobot2 are rated 2k and 3k, respectively, on KGS. CrazyStone is rated 2k. All of these numbers are with moderate time controls (not the 15 minute sudden death time controls that became a subject of controversy). There was also KCConGui, running KCC Igo, that played for a while on KGS. I don't know whether it was an official bot, or whether its departure had anything to do with its lopsided losing record against CrazyStone. The KCConGui page notes that KCC Igo won the Gifu Challenge four years in a row, most recently against sparse competition, but the best claim to the computer go throne belongs to Steenvreter, for edging out Mogo and CrazyStone in the stronger ICGA tournament. I thought Steenvreter only played 9x9 Go. The 19x19 ICGA tournament winners were MoGo, CrazyStone, and GnuGo in that order. Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
[computer-go] IEEE Spectrum article by Deep Blue creator
Greetings, I noticed that the following link was recently added to the Computer Go Wikipedia article. http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/oct07/5552 Cracking Go, by Feng-hsiung Hsu, IEEE Spectrum magazine, October 2007. He claims it should be possible to build a Go machine stronger than any human player. Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] IEEE Spectrum article by Deep Blue creator
On Oct 2, 2007, at 10:33 AM, Phil G wrote: On a slight different topic, for those of you with experience writing an evaluation function for an alpha-beta search, do you use the number of total moves played to weight different parts of the evaluation function? For example, it is easier towards the end of the game to know the certainly of certain points and use that as the evaluation function. But at the beginning of the game, an estimate of territory seems to be a better function (in light of not knowing the certain of any or few points). How do you merge these functions as the game transitions between middle game to end game? (and as different parts of the board are in various stages too). Phil This problem crops up in computer chess. The middlegame evaluation differs markedly from endgame evaluation. For example, in the former you wish to keep the king protected whereas in the endgame it becomes a mobile, active piece. One technique is to perform both evaluations, then combine them continuously weighted on how much the current position is middle-game-like or endgame-like. For example, it could be a linear combination dependent on the amount of material left on the board. In Go, it could be some other measure of the progress of the game, such as stone density or move number. It is important that the evaluations be combined continuously instead of via a sudden cutoff or threshold, in order to avoid border effects. Ian___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Go datastructures
On Jul 19, 2007, at 8:16 PM, Joshua Shriver wrote: Greetings, What kind of data structures do you all use for your engines, in respect to board representation and move generation. I know in chess bitboard, mailbox board[8][8], 0x88 exist all with their pro's and cons. Are there similar concepts for Go? -Josh There is a set of pages on Sensei's Library concerning this, including essays by David Fotland and Bruce Wilcox. http://senseis.xmp.net/?ComputerGoProgramming My beginner UCT program (http://www.quirkster.com/forth/fgp.html) uses bitboards because it is very simple to express the rules of Go using bit operations. However, a mailbox board which contains references into string objects which incrementally merge, split, and track their properties (stones, liberties, neighboring enemy strings) is likely to be faster in the long run and on larger boards, though far more complicated to implement correctly. Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: Fast data structures explained! (was Re: [computer-go] Go datastructures)
On Jul 20, 2007, at 8:04 AM, Jason House wrote: On 7/20/07, Peter Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jul 20, 2007, at 7:23 AM, Jason House wrote: Thanks for the documentation. I have a few questions. Looking at only the four neighbors to detect eye-like points seems like it could leave many false eyes and allow captures of dangling chains. Is there any mechanism to avoid this problem in the play of the bot? It does also look at the diagonals; see Board.isEyelike(). I'll note this in the next version of the document. I lost a game in the most recent tournament from a buggy alternative to isEyelike. I believe that it may be a bug that affects many, but I'm not really sure... That makes me especially interested in seeing how others do it and the trades they accepted for it. My program disallows playing in eyes (string of empty surrounded by self) unless a neighboring stone is in atari. That catches your special-case, but is not good for saving tails (strings connected by false eyes, often found along the edge of the board). Ian___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Go datastructures
On Jul 20, 2007, at 10:58 AM, Jason House wrote: On 7/20/07, Ian Osgood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My beginner UCT program (http://www.quirkster.com/forth/fgp.html) uses bitboards because it is very simple to express the rules of Go using bit operations. However, a mailbox board which contains references into string objects which incrementally merge, split, and track their properties (stones, liberties, neighboring enemy strings) is likely to be faster in the long run and on larger boards, though far more complicated to implement correctly. I've thought about bit boards, but my big stumbling block is how to efficiently handle captures. I can't think of any way to detect zero-liberty chains without explicitly specifying a chain to check. Given a specific position (say the neighbor of a point played), I don't know how to look up the chains surrounding it efficiently. Have you been able to solve any of these problems? I make no claims about efficiency. When making a move (: makemove) I check each neighbor (: check-captures) for being captured (: ? capture). I build the chain bitmap for a neightbor stone (: string) when needed by repeated dilation (BEGIN expand) AND the bitmap of our own stones (bover-and) until it stops growing (bd-top bd-count TUCK = UNTIL). The liberty bitmap (: liberties) is then one more dilation (expand) AND the empty bitmap (empty bd-top bd-and). If that bitmap is empty (bdup liberties b0=) then we capture the string (bd-top capture), which is just removing it from the enemy bitmap (enemy bd- xor) and adding it to the empty bitmap (empty bd-or). That's a lot of work, especially toward the endgame when the groups get large, hence my comment that a higher-level incremental representation is a better way to go in the long run. I did look at the code, but the language is sufficiently foreign to me that it's not easy to zero in on one function and know what it's doing. What language is it written in? Forth, my favorite tinkering language. Like Haskell, Lisp, and Prolog it can expand your mind in unaccustomed directions. Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: Fast data structures explained! (was Re: [computer-go] Go datastructures)
On Jul 20, 2007, at 2:25 PM, Andrés Domínguez wrote: 2007/7/20, Ian Osgood [EMAIL PROTECTED]: My program disallows playing in eyes (string of empty surrounded by self) unless a neighboring stone is in atari. That catches your special- case, but is not good for saving tails (strings connected by false eyes, often found along the edge of the board). Do you mean oiotoshi? Andrés Yes, thanks for the term. http://senseis.xmp.net/?Oiotoshi Ian___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: Fast data structures explained! (was Re: [computer-go] Go datastructures)
On Jul 20, 2007, at 12:10 PM, Jason House wrote: That's essentially the best that I came up with. Since bit board operations on 19x19 are slow... They are not necessarily slower than on smaller boards if you store only non-zero portions of your bitmaps along with the start and end row indices. The bitboard operations would be dealing with much less data, often just single rows. (Caveat: I haven't actually tried this yet.) Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
[computer-go] Who's going to the Gifu Challenge?
From what I can tell, there has not been a clash of the Go titans since the 2003 Gifu Challenge, which had all of KCC Igo, Haruka, Go+ +, Goemate/Handtalk, Many Faces, GNU Go, and Go Intellect participating. (This was the last public competition for many of these programs.) It seems with the tuning of MoGo and CrazyStone for the full size board and their recent success at the Olympiad, that there is a chance to knock KCC Igo (sold as Silver Star in Japan) from its four year throne. Are any of the Mogo, CrazyStone, and other professional program authors leaving room in their autumn schedules to travel to Ogaki City, Japan for this year's Gifu Challenge? Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Who's going to the Gifu Challenge?
On Jul 9, 2007, at 11:17 AM, Nick Wedd wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ian Osgood [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes From what I can tell, there has not been a clash of the Go titans since the 2003 Gifu Challenge, which had all of KCC Igo, Haruka, Go + +, Goemate/Handtalk, Many Faces, GNU Go, and Go Intellect participating. (This was the last public competition for many of these programs.) It seems with the tuning of MoGo and CrazyStone for the full size board and their recent success at the Olympiad, that there is a chance to knock KCC Igo (sold as Silver Star in Japan) from its four year throne. Are any of the Mogo, CrazyStone, and other professional program authors leaving room in their autumn schedules to travel to Ogaki City, Japan for this year's Gifu Challenge? Do we know that the Gifu Challenge is going to happen this October? Do you have a URL for it? Nick -- Nick Wedd[EMAIL PROTECTED] I guess there has not been an announcement yet, though it has been in early October the previous two years. Last year's pre-announcement was sent to the list on July 5. Perhaps the manager of the Computer Go Forum (http://www.computer-go.jp/index.html) has more information. Ian ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
