Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments: structure

Gian-Carlo Pascutto: <5731dc19.2020...@sjeng.org>: >On 10-05-16 11:23, Hideki Kato wrote: > >> CGOS is better place for those lower programs, isn't it? > >Not really, the pool of opponents is smaller and contains no humans. It >sort of depends on what the goal of the author is. Even if she's

Re: [Computer-go] Congratulations to Zen!

On 10-05-16 16:20, Detlef Schmicker wrote: > OK, this thread is quite long, and I am not sure I saw all posts > :) > > My suggestion, rate the bots on CGOS before the tournament and > take this rating for McMahon or for handicaps. This doesn't work for the reason stated in the exact post you're

Re: [Computer-go] Congratulations to Zen!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 OK, this thread is quite long, and I am not sure I saw all posts :) My suggestion, rate the bots on CGOS before the tournament and take this rating for McMahon or for handicaps. I think we can thrust the bot authors to take the correct rating and

Re: [Computer-go] Congratulations to Zen!

You understand correctly. I think that between us, would could reach agreement on what rankings to use for seeding. But no-one has the power to input seeds anyway. On 10 May 2016 at 14:09, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: > On 10-05-16 00:14, Erik van der Werf wrote: > > Oh that's

Re: [Computer-go] Rated Bot status on KGS

On 10 May 2016 at 13:39, Adrian Petrescu wrote: > If KGS is indeed still doing that thing where your rating change is > anchored to your opponents' ratings changes long after your game has > finished, then it seems to me the right solution is for wms to simply > disable that

Re: [Computer-go] Congratulations to Zen!

On 10-05-16 00:14, Erik van der Werf wrote: > Oh that's silly! IIRC if your bot is not ranked than users can do all > kind of cheating in the scoring phase (e.g., mark all your living stones > dead). I've not observed this behavior so far. Perhaps because in an unranked game there's no rating to

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments: structure

On 10-05-16 11:23, Hideki Kato wrote: > CGOS is better place for those lower programs, isn't it? Not really, the pool of opponents is smaller and contains no humans. It sort of depends on what the goal of the author is. Even if she's only interested in measuring vs other computer opponents, a

Re: [Computer-go] Rated Bot status on KGS

On 10-05-16 14:39, Adrian Petrescu wrote: > If KGS is indeed still doing that thing where your rating change is > anchored to your opponents' ratings changes long after your game has > finished, then it seems to me the right solution is for wms to simply > disable that anchoring for accounts that

Re: [Computer-go] Rated Bot status on KGS

If KGS is indeed still doing that thing where your rating change is anchored to your opponents' ratings changes long after your game has finished, then it seems to me the right solution is for wms to simply disable that anchoring for accounts that are bots. Whatever usefulness that setting has

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments: structure

Hi! On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 08:15:16AM +0100, Nick Wedd wrote: > A problem with McMahon is that the scheduling software (a module of the KGS > server, which I have no control over) uses the ratings assigned by KGS, and > many bots do not have such ratings. I don't think it's reasonable to >

[Computer-go] Rated Bot status on KGS

This message is mainly to explain the reasoning behind KGS's rules on granting rated-bot status. The rating system assumes that each player's strength is fairly stable. To give an example of the sort of thing that might upset the rating system: In the recent bot tournament, LeelaBot lost a game

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments: structure

CGOS is better place for those lower programs, isn't it? I'm not against creating lower division, just wonder if it's really necessary. Recently it's easier to implement "large patterns" which is necessary to beat GNU Go on 19x19 using DCNN than Remi's B-T model and so most programs could

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments: structure

That sounds like a good compromise to me. And the lower devision would hopefully encourage other participants with weaker bots so that Iomrascálaí and matilda don’t feel so alone. ;) Urban On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Nick Wedd wrote: > At present, KGS bot tournaments

Re: [Computer-go] Congratulations to Zen!

Yes, I would be OK with requiring rated bots if it were easy to get new accounts the “rated bot status”. I could have the account Imrscl031 for version 0.3.1 and so on and just abandon the old accounts as you say. But the fact that it takes so long to get a rated account makes this a bit

Re: [Computer-go] Congratulations to Zen!

More apologies. That should be "Zen19X". Nick On 10 May 2016 at 08:26, Nick Wedd wrote: > Thanks to those who have pointed out various errors in my reported. I have > now corrected it. > > I apologise for mis-spelling "Zen10X" in the first line of the message at > the top

Re: [Computer-go] Congratulations to Zen!

On 10 May 2016 at 07:57, Urban Hafner wrote: > My impression was that you can only get the status of a ranked bot if it’s > somehow “stable”. So that would mean that I would have to have a new > account for each new version of the bot, wouldn’t it? Especially with early

Re: [Computer-go] Congratulations to Zen!

Thanks to those who have pointed out various errors in my reported. I have now corrected it. I apologise for mis-spelling "Zen10X" in the first line of the message at the top of this thread. Nick On 9 May 2016 at 14:33, Nick Wedd wrote: > Congratulations to Xen19X, winner

[Computer-go] McMahon bot touraments on KGS

I have never run a KGS McMahon tournament. Everyone McMahon tournament I have run, played in, or been aware of has had more players than rounds, and most KGS bot tournaments have more rounds than players. So I would like to run an experimental McMahon tournament on KGS, to see what the scheduler

[Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments: structure

At present, KGS bot tournaments are run as Swiss tournaments. Entry is restricted to bots able to beat GNU Go, which is rated at 7k. Two suggestions have been made recently for changes in the structure. One is to allow bots of any strength to enter, and to have two divisions, with those unable

Re: [Computer-go] Congratulations to Zen!

My impression was that you can only get the status of a ranked bot if it’s somehow “stable”. So that would mean that I would have to have a new account for each new version of the bot, wouldn’t it? Especially with early stage bots like mine the jumps in strength can be quite large. But on the

Re: [Computer-go] Congratulations to Zen!

We are waiting for the superadmin to set LeelaBot's status to Rated. She has not been active recently, maybe she is on vacation. Nick On 9 May 2016 at 23:14, Erik van der Werf wrote: > Oh that's silly! IIRC if your bot is not ranked than users can do all kind > of