I'm seriously considering to overhaul the archive system with CGI scripts to
make it easy to grab anything by date range and player name.
But it's not there now.
- Don
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 8:42 AM, Łukasz Lew wrote:
> But not as old as January archive, but for example from yesterday.
> Can
I don't know of any web pages.
I'm pretty sure my reference implementations are easy to understand. The
are short and concise and single file if I remember. And I think they are
reasonable efficient.And of course it's all Linux based.
I have these implementations:
C
Vala
Java
e spectrum of bad moves is wide, it's just that it takes
> someone many stones stronger to severely punish small differences
> between good and nearly-good moves. among players of relatively
> similar strength, these differences will go unnoticed and unpunished.
>
> s.
>
>
A simplistic model that helps explain this is golf. On a single hole, even
a casual golfer has a realistic chance of out-golfing Tiger Woods. Tiger
occasionally shoots a 1 over par on some hole and even weak amateurs
occasionally par or even birdie a hole.It's not going to happen a lot,
but
I don't quite understand this. If I try move m0, which we will assume is
the only winning move, but on the first simulation it turns out to lose,
then from what you seem to be saying I would never try it again?
Also, which move do you try in the 56/100 example:
A) wins 56/100 = 0.56
B) win
But odd move numbers always mean black to move. That becomes second nature
very quickly and I personally prefer the less verbose syntax.
- Don
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 1:47 AM, Darren Cook wrote:
> > translated to Ishi-go
> > B 1 Q4
> > W 2 R16
> > B 3 C4
> > W 4 F3
> > ...
> >
> > ***
My email got cut off near the end.My final thought was that it would be
preferable to stick with GTP, just a revised asynchronous version.
- Don
2009/4/21 Don Dailey
> Yes, this is a powerful feature that all chess interfaces have.
>
> There is one issue with GTP that will h
Yes, this is a powerful feature that all chess interfaces have.
There is one issue with GTP that will have to be kludged around - there is
no way to stop an engine from thinking that is provided naturally by gtp.
GTP has the nice feature that you can pipe in commands from a file, but it's
not an i
I use mingw to produce cros platform executables. I can build executables
for linux, win32 and win64, which for my chess program is a must since it's
64 bit.
- Don
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 5:33 AM, Łukasz Lew wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 11:23, elife wrote:
> >> I forgot about cygwin ind
>
> I recall reading about an Elo system that had better adaptation to players
> whose
> rating changes. It was called Glicko-2. Here is a link:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glicko_rating_system
>
This would be a very poor rating system for CGOS. He basically recommends
giving much higher K fa
What do you mean logins?
2009/4/20 Łukasz Lew
> Hardware might be not important for fixed number of playouts.
> Can you give us logins?
>
> 2009/4/20 Don Dailey :
> > Jason,
> >
> > This means nothing - can you give us more details? What did the error
> bar
Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Apr 20, 2009, at 4:08 PM, Don Dailey wrote:
>
> That should be interesting.
>
> So we have
>
> 1. ego-v0.115-100k
>
> 2. libEGO-v0.115-100k
>
> Is that correct? We can watch it's bayelo rating as well as it's
> incremental
That should be interesting.
So we have
1. ego-v0.115-100k
2. libEGO-v0.115-100k
Is that correct? We can watch it's bayelo rating as well as it's
incremental rating.
- Don
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Łukasz Lew wrote:
> Rated: 1713 as of 2007-12-29 09:28:46
> http://cgos.board
The Bayeselo page would not deal well with it, since it assumes each player
is a unique individual with a fixed playing strength. In this case, the
incrementally rated main page would do a better job.
What I'm thinking about doing is to measure the ratings of active players
compared to the bay
The best way to get an accurate picture is to ignore the main page and go to
the "Latest Bayeselo" which does a full performance rating on all games
every played on CGOS. There will be no bias and you have error bars.
The main page just tracks ratings incrementally and is not a very good
syst
I just restarted it.
2009/4/19 Brian Sheppard
> cgosview-win32 has been showing game 742478 as the most-recent game for
> quite a while.
>
> ___
> computer-go mailing list
> computer-go@computer-go.org
> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/co
I put something out there. Not sure how well it will play, but it
probably has a rating as it's played before.
- Don
2009/4/17 Brian Sheppard
> There are actually very few programs playing on CGOS (9x9). My engine is
> rated around 1000, which means that it plays 75% of its games against
>
Don't know, but I just gave it a kick. could be that nobody is playing?
- Don
2009/4/17 Brian Sheppard
>
>
> ___
> computer-go mailing list
> computer-go@computer-go.org
> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
>
_
On Wed, 2009-04-15 at 02:35 +0200, Robert Jasiek wrote:
> Technical remark: the position is the same, the situation differs.
I don't use the terminology correctly. To me a "position" is the game
state including side to move. But I know that is not accepted
terminology.
Since elegance is a
I remember seeing a paper or something on this a good while back. If I
remember correctly, it is possible to legitimately criticize both types
of superko based on some obscure corner cases that are possible. I
don't remember the details and I'm certainly no expert.
- Don
On Tue, 2009-04-14 a
I personally feel that situational superko is more elegant even though I
use PSK in CGOS.I did that mainly to be more compatible with KGS
rules and Tromp/Taylor rules.
I don't believe my arguments against it make much different in practice
and I'm a practical person but ...
Here is why I p
Hi Brain,
I get a superko bug report or two almost every month since CGOS has been
running (2 or 3 years?)It's usually due to a misunderstanding of
which specific superko rule CGOS uses. CGOS uses positional superko.
I'm quite sure there is no bug here. There are OTHER bugs in the
server, b
On Sat, 2009-04-04 at 06:14 -0400, steve uurtamo wrote:
> Moreover, this is a really complicated issue.
Yes, and I think cheating will always be possible. It's like
cryptography, nothing is ever unbreakable.
I was quite appalled at how often it happened in computer chess when I
was active
0400
This looks just like the reference bot (AMAF). I was looking for something
MCTS.
Don Dailey wrote:
> The source code is a single file called valaGo.vala and it's pretty
> simple and short.
>
> I added a 64 bit binary for linux if you are interested and a README.
>
>
09 20:57:38 -0400
Great. Could you send it to me or give me a link?
Don Dailey wrote:
> I don't have a c# bot, but I'll bet the Vala version I wrote is very
> similar, as Vala was designed based on C# from what I understand.
>
> - Don
>
> -Original Message-
>
I don't have a c# bot, but I'll bet the Vala version I wrote is very
similar, as Vala was designed based on C# from what I understand.
- Don
-Original Message-
From: Michael Williams
Reply-To: computer-go
To: computer-go
Subject: [computer-go] C# bot to share?
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2009 19
It's possible I made a mistake. I may have restarted the server before
I tried to connect with the view - I'm not sure.
The viewer should work even if many people connect however. I can run 2
or more copies of it easily.
- Don
-Original Message-
From: Magnus Persson
Reply-To: comput
Hi Magnus,
Can I use your examples and such and put a section in the web page?
As far as I know, CGOS has not been down. Unless it was somehow
preventing logins or something.The way to test is to bring up the
viewer, it will not come up at all if CGOS is down.
I put 3 weak programs on th
n the cgos script
in there. Is that right?
Second: the instructions imply that if I just run the script then I will
get something self-explanatory. But when I do so it only works to a
point:
(Pebbles) 1 % cgosGtp.exe
cgosGtp 0.98 alpha - engine client for CGOS Windows-x86 by Don
Dailey
e instructions imply that if I just run the script then I will
get something self-explanatory. But when I do so it only works to a
point:
(Pebbles) 1 % cgosGtp.exe
cgosGtp 0.98 alpha - engine client for CGOS Windows-x86 by Don
Dailey
Usage: C:/Users/Brian/DOCUME~1/Go/Pebbles/cgosGtp
Has anyone done a good analysis on the value of the mercy rule? It is
a major or minor speedup? And how does it affect the quality of the
search? Is it more useful with bigger board sizes?
It seems like I remember seeing that many believed it to be a very minor
improvement if any, but I'm
Hi Olivier,
I would love to have a binary for the linux platform. I run 64 bit
linux, if that makes any difference.
- Don
On Sun, 2009-02-22 at 21:12 +0100, Olivier Teytaud wrote:
> Hi.
>
> For your email about newer versions of MoGo;
> technically, the main differences with version 3 ar
On Tue, 2009-02-17 at 23:29 -0800, David Fotland wrote:
> It's not true that MCTS only goes a few ply. In 19x19 games on 32 CPU
> cores, searching about 3 million play outs per move, Many Faces of Go
> typically goes over 15 ply in the PV in the UCT tree.
That's what I meant when I said a few ply
On Tue, 2009-02-17 at 20:04 +0100, dave.de...@planet.nl wrote:
> A simple alfabeta searcher will only get a few plies deep on 19x19, so
> it won't be very useful (unless your static evaluation function is so
> good that it doesn't really need an alfabeta searcher)
I have to say that I believe this
On Sun, 2009-02-08 at 03:15 +0100, Raymond Wold wrote:
> Darren Cook wrote:
> >> It's just a can of worms to require some proprietary binary that people
> >> have to use, trust, and believe is unhackable.
> >
> > Reverse-engineering the binary itself to then make your own client is
> > still a ri
Here is a simple protocol:
email your program to me, and I will test it on my local network :-)
All protocols require some trust somewhere, in this case you must trust
me to test it fairly and not distribute your program in the case that
you want to keep it protected.
- Don
On Tue, 2009-02
On Mon, 2009-02-02 at 18:09 +0100, Isaac Deutsch wrote:
> "I don't think many people realize that you have to play hundreds of
> games just to be within 40 or 50 ELO with much certainty. If you
> play
> less than 100 games you could easily be off by over 100 ELO."
>
> Maybe I'm a bit (a lot :) i
On Mon, 2009-02-02 at 09:40 -0500, Jason House wrote:
> Also, I noticed your rank measurements were based on CGOS results
> after relatively few games. It can retain significant bias for quite
> a
> while.
Yes, and you should go by the bayeselo page which is a better picture of
what is going o
On Sun, 2009-02-01 at 13:19 +0100, "Ingo Althöfer" wrote:
> Now, question: Would the computer-go mailinglist accept or
> welcome when the computer Havannah people uses this mailing list
> for the next few months?
Not a problem for me.
- Don
___
compu
The thing about computer chess is that "the swift do not always win the
race." Many times in the past modest hardware has beaten powerful
hardware. Even Deep Blue didn't always win the tournaments it played
in.
They came to one competition and Campbell told me that they had
estimated their win
Hi Joshua,
Yes, I think it was implicitly understood that these chess competitions
were about creating the best chess playing (non-human) entity. However
human nature being what it is we attach the author to the program and
judge the author through his program.
However, if you create a really
On Wed, 2009-01-14 at 20:44 -0200, Mark Boon wrote:
> On Jan 14, 2009, at 3:40 PM, Don Dailey wrote:
>
> > However, the best thing to do is to ignore that page and go the "Bayes
> > Rated" link which is updated every day. This is the total
> > performan
It could very well reach 3.0 too fast - I didn't make any attempt to
tune this and it's my own system that eventually just becomes a k=3
incrementally rated ELO system.
However, the best thing to do is to ignore that page and go the "Bayes
Rated" link which is updated every day. This is the tota
Had rules like this been in affect in earlier years, where you limit
participants to commodity hardware, we would have never seen Cray Blitz,
Deep Blue, Bebe, Belle and others that were a very important part of
computer chess history.
This comes down to whether you are trying to turn this into a
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 20:29 +0100, Olivier Teytaud wrote:
>
> I don't know the answer, but it's not too surprising - with
> random play
> the komi should be something like 2 or 3, so white with 7.5
> komi has a
> pretty good advantage. This advantage di
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 19:27 +0100, i...@gmx.ch wrote:
> Hi,
>
> What's an usual winning rate for black/white from an empty 9x9 board, black
> playing first, 7.5 komi? I play 50k games when starting my program, and I
> usually get around 60% winning rate for white. This seems rather high to me,
better.
- Don
On Tue, 2008-12-30 at 23:22 +0100, Heikki Levanto wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 02:01:29PM -0500, Don Dailey wrote:
> > It looks like 3 is no good:
> >
> > Rank Name Elo+- games score oppo. draws
> >1 base 2000 296 199 3 67
On Wed, 2008-12-31 at 17:59 +0200, Berk Ozbozkurt wrote:
> Heikki Levanto wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 08:01:27PM +0200, Berk Ozbozkurt wrote:
> >
> >> I think such a change may make engine objectively stronger while making
> >> it more vulnerable against humans. Even if the human opponen
On Wed, 2008-12-31 at 14:45 +0100, Heikki Levanto wrote:
> Of course a clever player who
> knows about this can direct the game so that he ends with a moyo,
> where the
> optimal reduction move does not get considered. That sounds tricky,
> and the
> advantage from such is slight, he can be a tiny
On Wed, 2008-12-31 at 12:25 +, p...@tabor.com wrote:
> I think Heikki makes a valid point here. I am not a particularly
> strong player (about 1-2 dan european), but I have learned that
> playing defensively is generally detrimental to the final result,
> whereas taking the initiative is more l
On Wed, 2008-12-31 at 00:25 +0100, Rémi Coulom wrote:
> Don Dailey wrote:
> > You are right, the d3p version rallied to come from behind and staged
> > an exciting and dramatic comeback:
> >
> > Rank Name Elo+- games score oppo. draws
> >1 d3p
On Tue, 2008-12-30 at 23:22 +0100, Heikki Levanto wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 02:01:29PM -0500, Don Dailey wrote:
> > It looks like 3 is no good:
> >
> > Rank Name Elo+- games score oppo. draws
> >1 base 2000 296 199 3 67% 18880%
&g
On Tue, 2008-12-30 at 13:13 -0800, Christoph Birk wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Dec 2008, Don Dailey wrote:
> > Distance 3 could easily play worse - we shall see. Just because a
> > distance 3 move is sometimes good doesn't mean it will make the program
> > play better not thr
On Tue, 2008-12-30 at 12:19 -0800, Christoph Birk wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Dec 2008, Don Dailey wrote:
> > Rank Name Elo+- games score oppo. draws
> > 1 base 2000 296 199 3 67% 18880%
> > 2 d3p 1888 199 296 3 33% 20000%
> >
> >
one
>
> On Dec 30, 2008, at 2:01 PM, Don Dailey wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2008-12-30 at 12:52 -0500, steve uurtamo wrote:
> >> that's with "or manhattan distance 2" as well? how about 3 or 4?
> >
> > It looks like 3 is no good:
> >
> > Ra
99 296 3 33% 20000%
I think I have proven decisively that 3 doesn't work, it lost 2 out of
the 3 games I played :-)
- Don
>
> s.
>
> On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 7:42 PM, Don Dailey wrote:
> > After 842 games with 19x19 go the version with the 3-4-5 line rule is
&
On Tue, 2008-12-30 at 20:01 +0200, Berk Ozbozkurt wrote:
> Don Dailey wrote:
> > After 842 games with 19x19 go the version with the 3-4-5 line rule is
> > scoring about 55%
> >
> > I thought it might do better, I think the rule is reasonably sound - but
> > 55%
that's with "or manhattan distance 2" as well? how about 3 or 4?
>
> s.
>
> On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 7:42 PM, Don Dailey wrote:
> > After 842 games with 19x19 go the version with the 3-4-5 line rule is
> > scoring about 55%
> >
> > I thought it mi
After 842 games with 19x19 go the version with the 3-4-5 line rule is
scoring about 55%
I thought it might do better, I think the rule is reasonably sound - but
55% is pretty respectable for such an easy change and it hardly slows
down the search at all.
Rank Name Elo+- games score oppo
On Wed, 2008-12-24 at 19:43 +0100, Heikki Levanto wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 01:27:46PM -0500, Don Dailey wrote:
> > Basically, in the playouts or move choice I veto any move to the 3rd 4th
> > or 5th line unless there is a stone of either color within distance 2
> &g
- George
>
> On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 8:46 AM, Don Dailey wrote:
> > 19x19 results of 3,4,5 rank rule:
> >
> >
> > Rank Name Elo+- games score oppo. draws
> > 1 d2p 2050 21 21 273 57% 20000%
> > 2 base 2000 21 21 273 4
un...@computer-go.org
> [mailto:computer-go-boun...@computer-go.org] On Behalf Of Don Dailey
> Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2008 5:47 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: [computer-go] 19x19 results (so far)
>
> 19x19 results of 3,4,5 rank rule:
>
>
> Rank Name Elo+
19x19 results of 3,4,5 rank rule:
Rank Name Elo+- games score oppo. draws
1 d2p 2050 21 21 273 57% 20000%
2 base 2000 21 21 273 43% 20500%
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://
On Tue, 2008-12-23 at 10:15 +0100, Rémi Coulom wrote:
> Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
> > Rémi Coulom wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Null-move pruning only make sense in alpha-beta. MCTS/UCT are more like
> >> min-max. They do no alpha-beta pruning, so cannot do null-move pruning.
> >>
> >
> > Null move
I do have a few 19x19 games
Rank Name Elo+- games score oppo. draws
1 d2p 2080 37 3693 61% 20000%
2 base 2000 36 3793 39% 20800%
Due to such low samples, I'm testing d2p first. At some point I will
add d3p.
I'm testing these at 10,000 playo
On Mon, 2008-12-22 at 14:05 +0100, Heikki Levanto wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 07:20:24AM -0500, steve uurtamo wrote:
> > don, this rule is very intuitive for a 19x19 board even if you include
> > the 5th line.
>
> Yes, and much more effective, as there are more points it will disallow.
> Espe
As previously mentioned, I have been testing the rule which says move
only to the 3rd and 4th lines unless something is nearby.In this
case, the rule is 3-5 lines.
I started with 200 playouts, because I'm also interested in how this
rule affects play at various depths. Here is the 200 playo
On Wed, 2008-12-10 at 12:39 -0800, terry mcintyre wrote:
> Most of those 55 distinct moves are rarely used in the opening. I once
> heard a simple rule which seems to cover just about everything
> interesting: "consider only moves which are on the 3rd and 4th lines,
> and/or within a manhattan dist
On Sat, 2008-12-20 at 16:04 +0100, Rémi Coulom wrote:
> Still, some programmers tried null move in 9x9 alpha-beta go
> programs.
> As far as I remember, they got no strength improvement from it.
I tried null move once in my very weak alpha/beta go program. The
issue with recursive deep search
Of course it would be nice to have a standardized ELO based system so
that you can compare ratings directly. But this seems unlikely to
happen on purpose. The way it could happen is if some organization
becomes the defacto standard due to popularity - but I don't think that
has happened even in
The accuracy of an elimination (sometimes called knockout) tournament is
greatly enhanced if the pairings are done correctly, which depends on
having a fairly reliable indication of the strength of the programs.
Was this done?
The idea is that early rounds should be forgone conclusions - the t
On Thu, 2008-12-18 at 03:27 +, Weston Markham wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 11:10 PM, Mark Boon wrote:
> > It would have been much more persuasive if you had simply run a 5K
> > playout bot against a 100K bot and see which wins more.
>
> In 200 games, 100k beat 5k a total of 127 times. So
On Tue, 2008-12-16 at 19:34 -0500, Weston Markham wrote:
> I don't know, although I was under the impression that I had
> downloaded the "pure" version. I found a reference to the source here
> on the list, and downloaded and compiled that. When I get back home,
> how would I quickly determine wh
On Tue, 2008-12-16 at 19:34 -0500, Weston Markham wrote:
> I may do that, although personally I would be far more cautious about
> drawing conclusions from those matches, as compared to ones played
> against a strong reference opponent. But I guess other people feel
> differently about this. Anyw
On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 17:30 -0500, Weston Markham wrote:
> Out of 3637 matches using 5k playouts, jrefgo won (i.e., was ahead
> after 10 moves, as estimated by gnugo) 1688 of them. (46.4%)
> Out of 2949 matches using 100k playouts, jrefgo won 785. (26.6%)
>
> It appears clear to me that increasi
On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 14:51 -0800, terry mcintyre wrote:
> > From: Don Dailey
> >
> > On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 14:22 -0800, terry mcintyre wrote:
> > > In my experience with IT systems administration, people do tend to let
> > > the hardware do the heavy lifting
e: "running 10k playouts can be significantly worse than running 5k
> playouts."
>
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 2:27 PM, Don Dailey wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 14:17 -0500, Weston Markham wrote:
> >> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 12:02 PM, Michael Williams
> >&g
On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 14:22 -0800, terry mcintyre wrote:
> In my experience with IT systems administration, people do tend to let
> the hardware do the heavy lifting when algorithmic improvements could
> double and quadruple the performance. We don't know much about the
> space of useful algorithms
On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 09:18 -0200, Mark Boon wrote:
> My understanding of the PlayStation is that it's a Cell architecture,
> with one main CPU and six auxilary processing units with limited
> capability. Of course you don't need much for something to do MC
> playouts, so it seems a very suit
On Wed, 2008-12-10 at 12:39 -0800, terry mcintyre wrote:
> Most of those 55 distinct moves are rarely used in the opening. I once
> heard a simple rule which seems to cover just about everything
> interesting: "consider only moves which are on the 3rd and 4th lines,
> and/or within a manhattan dist
On Wed, 2008-12-10 at 12:03 -0800, terry mcintyre wrote:
> > From: Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > On Wed, 2008-12-10 at 18:56 +, tony tang wrote:
> > Some of my programs do not place any stone on the edge, unless it
> > touches some other stone. I
On Wed, 2008-12-10 at 18:56 +, tony tang wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> It would be interesting to know how everyone limits the number of
> possible moves at the
> beginning of the game. Assuming the board is 19x19 with no handicap
> and black placed a stone,
> that leaves (in theory) 390 possible p
On Sun, 2008-12-07 at 12:12 +0100, Rémi Coulom wrote:
> Ingo Althöfer wrote:
> >
> > Concerning the next Computer Olympiad and having in mind
> > the discussion on the last one ("how fair is 7.5 komi for
> > 9x9 computer games?") the WMSG scoring should be worth
> > to be discussed for 9x9.
> >
On Wed, 2008-12-03 at 11:24 -0200, Mark Boon wrote:
> If this is because I use Java, then
> Don's concise C implementation of the MC-AMAF bot should be a lot
> faster than my bloated Java version.
I don't remember the numbers, but my own java and C implementation were
written in the same style
I had a chess program years ago that was blindingly fast on some
computers, very slow on others. It was all about the cache. The move
generator was hard coded for each piece on each square. For instance a
white pawn on d7 had it's very own move specialized move generator.
There was a function
On Sun, 2008-11-30 at 14:33 -0800, terry mcintyre wrote:
>
> - Original Message
> > From: Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > MCTS really feels to me like a superb book building algorithm.
> > Computer Chess books (at least the automated part)
ts. The moves
that score the best are played the most. We have a kind of MCTS here.
- Don
On Sun, 2008-11-30 at 09:15 -0800, terry mcintyre wrote:
> > From: Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > I've always had this idea that the best way to build an opening bo
ing anyway), if I see a winning-rate of around 60% or
> more I keep it. Anything in between I might decide to let it run a
> bit more. The improvements that I keep I run with longer thinking
> times overnight to see if they scale. After all, the only real test
> worth anything is
On Sun, 2008-11-30 at 13:38 +0100, Olivier Teytaud wrote:
> But, it is also clearly established that the building of the opening
> book by self-play
> clearly works, whereas it is roughly the same idea. I guess the reason
> is the
> difference of strength of the player - a MCTS (Monte-Carlo Tree S
On Sat, 2008-11-29 at 11:58 +0100, Denis fidaali wrote:
>
> From my own experience, an important testing case whenever trying
> to get AMAF to work, is the scaling study.
>
No truer words ever spoken. This is one of the secrets to strong
programs, if they scale, they are probably soundly desig
ntrol without too many compromises. One of them could
be the next C.
We may look back in 10 or 20 years and see that we have been foolish.
It could be that the problem is with the processors we use, designed a
very specific way to basically support C programming. So maybe we are
perpetuating our
On Thu, 2008-11-27 at 12:59 -0500, steve uurtamo wrote:
> don,
>
> i agree, although i will point out one of C's biggest flaws, which
> happens (conveniently for the sake of this argument) to be its
> least important one for game programming:
>
> string handling sucks
>
> if i never have to hand
On Thu, 2008-11-27 at 13:03 -0200, Mark Boon wrote:
> You say you're going to try to make a prototype first and then when it
> shows promise, move to a more flexible language like Java. What
> language are you intending to use? It seems the wrong way around to
> me. Develop the prototype in a flexi
On Thu, 2008-11-27 at 02:05 -0800, Dave Dyer wrote:
> At 01:52 AM 11/27/2008, Denis fidaali wrote:
>
> ...
> > But what really lacks (or i wasn't able to find anyway) is a strong
> > community like there is for go.
> >
> > A CGOS equivalent.
> > A GTP equivalent.
> > A Gogui equivalent.
> > A Kgs
On Wed, 2008-11-26 at 10:10 +0100, Olivier Teytaud wrote:
> y the way, during the IAGO 2008 (meeting between mogo and Catalin
> Taranu),
> a very angry guy came during the preliminary games against amateur
> players
> and shouted that we were "mixing war and art", and plenty
> of other strange opin
On Sat, 2008-11-22 at 10:44 -0800, Ross Werner wrote:
> Don Dailey wrote:
> > Rexchess doesn't run on todays computers because they are too fast.
> > One of the first things rexchess did was measure the speed of the
> > computer, because it had a function to simula
On Sat, 2008-11-22 at 10:36 -0800, terry mcintyre wrote:
> The term "web site" had no meaning prior to 1991. If we are talking about
> "decades ago", it might have been an ftp or gopher site, or a BBS.
I think rexchess came along in the late 1980's, early 1990's.I think
my first computer che
On Sat, 2008-11-22 at 17:54 +0100, "Ingo Althöfer" wrote:
> Hello Don,
>
> thx for all your answers.
> I think, I found a website where old programs
> (from the 19_80s and early 90's) are listed:
>
> http://www.septober.de/chess/index.htm#
>
> There are also screenshots of RexChess
> http://www.
On Sat, 2008-11-22 at 15:13 +, Matthew Woodcraft wrote:
> Don Dailey wrote:
> > A few years later I was pointed to a site where I could download that
> > and just about any commercial chess program.We are talking several
> > decades ago, I didn't bookmark the s
The program was RexChess and it goes back several decades. We only
sold a few thousands copies and it wasn't copy protected.
In Europe we sold something like 40 copies, probably mostly in Germany
but I can only guess.
In computer chess tournaments I constantly had people come up to me wi
201 - 300 of 2315 matches
Mail list logo
