:
Mark Boon wrote:
What I have now takes 10-15 microseconds on a 2Ghz Intel computer
to find all the patterns on a board (on average for 9x9, for
19x19 it's more like 15-20 usec)
From your difference between 9x9 and 19x19 I assume that you are
updating
the patterns of the cells after a stone
Lately I have been putting some effort into pattern-matching.
Although I have made progress, the result was not as good as what I
had hoped for by about an order of magnitude. This makes me wonder
what is currently actually the state of the art of pattern matching
in Go.
Of course it's a
By the way, is CGOS working? I get connection refused when starting
the viewer.
Mark
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
is complete, the server
will
shutdown and restart. Don't know if this is an issue, but I
did it
anyway - it does hurt in view of the bug.
- Don
Mark Boon wrote:
By the way, is CGOS working? I get connection refused when starting
the viewer.
Mark
, basically a single
pass statistics gathering. So you must basically show it a gazillion
sample patterns with known classifications.You could build these
from games of strong players for instance.
- Don
Mark Boon wrote:
Lately I have been putting some effort into pattern-matching
a connection error unless the server is off-line.
- Don
Mark Boon wrote:
Strange. I even tried downloading a new file from the web-page. I get
the following:
could not execute couldn't open socket: connection refused
logout
[Process completed]
I used to be able to run it, I'm not aware of changing
On 4-mrt-08, at 14:34, terry mcintyre wrote:
Knowing that most current programs have a weakness
with regard to nakade, then any program which believes
it is behind ought to try and exploit such weaknesses,
no?
That assumes creating a situation where the nakade is misevaluated
once you're
On 3-mrt-08, at 18:43, Don Dailey wrote:
I base that logic on my observations that once the score goes below
10%
for Lazarus, it is losing. It's extremely rare that it salvages a
game
once the score goes below even 20%.
In which case I could argue that attempts at winning by playing
On 12-feb-08, at 17:39, Christoph Birk wrote:
All games that white won W+0.5 would reverse to B+0.5 if you
lowered the komi by 1 pt.
Unless you used some MC bot, then W would still win by 0.5 :)
___
computer-go mailing list
At the moment it's not possible to develop iPhone applications. An
SDK comes out this months and we have to wait and see what it supports.
Mark
On 6-feb-08, at 18:21, Don Dailey wrote:
Jason House wrote:
Just curious if anyone knows if this is possible. cgosView has a mac
(universal)
Although most of my time has been eaten up by implementing/improving
some general framework parts I did get a chance to play a bit with a
simple UCT search. Some things that I found puzzled me a bit and I
hoped someone had an explanation or similar experiences.
I implemented a very basic
Recently one of the things I've been doing is introducing more and
more generics in my code. In the days when I was using C++ I always
felt templates were a mixed blessing. It's a powerful concept but it
also often makes code extremely difficult to read and debug. Maybe
this has improved a
30, 2008 at 01:15:39PM -0200, Mark Boon wrote:
There's one bit that so far thwarts my effort to obtain maximum
modularization. And that is I have a GoEngine interface that is kind
of mirroring GTP, since GTP is the preferred communication method
between Go-playing engines. My design could be a lot
On 30-jan-08, at 15:06, Jason House wrote:
On Jan 30, 2008 12:02 PM, steve uurtamo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
you should rename the protocol TP then.
Or just call it game text protocol ;)
Which is of course exactly what I said in my message. Maybe it's the
idealist in me thinking we
On 22-jan-08, at 10:31, Erik van der Werf wrote:
On Jan 22, 2008 11:14 AM, Petri Pitkanen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
9x9 is not Go
At some point in history the common board size was 17x17.
Are you suggesting that 17x17 wasn't Go either?
In the future, when humans are consistently defeated
On 22-jan-08, at 11:21, Don Dailey wrote:
Hi Mark,
I think it's Petri who was the condescending one.
Well, you could see it as condescending if someone pooh-poohs 9x9 Go.
But then one should argue that if you'd want to. But to pretend by
deduction he also claims 17x17 or 19x19 are not
On 22-jan-08, at 11:33, Magnus Persson wrote:
So feel free to argue that 19x19 has properties that are unique,
but in doing so please *specify* exactly what this means and why a
computer program has to deal with it to play really strong.
Magnus,
Would you argue the same for 3x3 Go?
I
On 18-jan-08, at 12:47, Don Dailey wrote:
I recently read an interesting blog on this, where it was claimed
that
early optimization SHOULD be done when performance is actually a
consideration (and sometimes it isn't.) The idea is that if ignore
performance consideration early, you
I'm fairly new on the subject of Monte Carlo and am in the process of
catching up on reading, so I hope you guys have some patience with me
while I get into this and ask a lot of questions. I got side-tracked
away from computer-Go programming for quite a while for various
reasons but have
On 18-jan-08, at 12:01, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
But the speed of the random playout becoms less and less important
with heavy playouts.
This I don't understand at all. The improvement curve for being
faster isn't different with heavy than with light playouts.
I see I didn't word this
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Boon
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 10:11 AM
To: computer-go
Subject: Re: [computer-go] How to get more participation in 19x19
CGOS?
As suggested by David Fotland I made a simple
On 16-jan-08, at 11:54, Christoph Birk wrote:
I think this is very wrong, like allowing suicide.
If you allow (or forbid) moves that cannot really (should) be
played in the
random games you are not sampling the true status of the board.
I think most people take a much too dogmatic point of
On 16-jan-08, at 17:22, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We can use math to shed some light on the topic:
* Assume that doubling the speed of a machine
increases the rank of a program by 100 ELO,
as Don has previously concluded.
* Then we have the following table of approximate
costs, which
Don,
Although I'm not interested in this feature at this point in time I
applaud the effort you put into this server.
Just some information with regards to Mac clients: it turns out Macs
come with a tcl runtime out of the box. So you should point Mac users
simply to the cgos3.tcl file
I see now what people mean with regards to the starting of rounds.
Most bots are idle most of the time while a few slow ones slug it out.
The way it's currently configured was probably the simplest way to do
it and get reasonably uniform results. Otherwise you may end up with
fast bots
I came back to my computer to see an error message about a broken
pipe. I also see my program lost a game on time to Odie, which is
probably caused by this. Is this common? Or does it mean I have a
problem on my end? I do have a rather slow internet connection.
Mark
I have a Java version of the old Goliath 3. I have a GTP bridge also.
If it's not a lot of work I'd consider putting it on 19x19 CGOS. How
would I go about doing that? (I have a Mac but could possibly arrange
a PC.)
At the moment the Java translation has an annoying bug that I haven't
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Boon
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2008 8:52 AM
To: computer-go
Subject: Re: [computer-go] How to get more participation in 19x19
CGOS?
I have a Java version of the old Goliath 3. I have
On 9-jan-08, at 16:11, Don Dailey wrote:
cgos3.tcl is the equivalent of kgsGTP. cgos3.tcl communicates
through stdin and stdout.The Java wrapper will not benefit you
unless it actually provided GTP to a program that doesn't know gtp.
- Don
I hope we're having a bit of
On 9-jan-08, at 15:45, Don Dailey wrote:
The cgos3-darwin.zip client on the web site will attach you to the 9x9
server - unless you actually modify it by unwrapping it, changing it,
then wrapping it back up. If you want, I will wrap up a version
that will work for 19x19.
OK, I think
OK, got it working. But it didn't remove all the dead stones
unfortunately. Is there any way to get the SGF file of the game so I
can test why it didn't do that? Or do I need to save it locally?
Mark
On 9-jan-08, at 19:51, Don Dailey wrote:
Mark Boon wrote:
On 9-jan-08, at 15:45, Don
On 5-jan-08, at 11:48, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
Would you explain the details of the playout policy?
(1) Captures of groups that could not save themselves last move.
(2) Save groups in atari due to last move by capturing or extending.
(3) Patterns next to last move.
(4) Global moves.
Don,
This has taken me some time to formulate an answer. Mainly because
you are making so many assumption about what I understand or imagine
and what not. It makes for a confused discussion and I didn't feel
like getting into arguments like no, that's not what I meant etc.
Let me
Question: how do MC programs perform with a long ladder on the board?
My understandig of MC is limited but thinking about it, a crucial
long ladder would automatically make the chances of any playout
winning 50-50, regardless of the actual outcome of the ladder. If
this is the case then:
On 6-dec-07, at 19:29, Don Dailey wrote:
Here is an example of why this works so well and why your greedy
approach is so wrong:
Consider a position where there are 2 groups left that are being
fought over. One of these groups is very large and the other is quite
small.The computer
I watched MoGo play a few games on KGS. I think it plays very nicely
most of the time. I find it hard to judge its strength, as it
occasionally does some strange things, but overall it plays a sound
game.
One thing that may make human players biased with regards to its
strength is its
On 2-mrt-07, at 16:34, Don Dailey wrote:
Łukasz,
Yes, I would like to see some of these problems solved.
As I mentioned, UCI doesn't have any of these issues.
After thinking about this, there is perhaps a backwards
compatible solution:
1. Don't change GTP, just add to it.
2. Have a
On 7-feb-07, at 02:20, Dmitry Kamenetsky wrote:
I have been reading this list for nearly a year now and it is very
discouraging to receive so much criticism for my first post.
Don't be discouraged please. The big-mouths don't always represent
what the majority thinks.
The yahoo
On 21-jan-07, at 19:27, Don Dailey wrote:
not considering biological factors
which would cut into this a bit.
There was a time when there were no time-limits in Go, which was
abused by many players by turning a game into a stamina contest. I
believe this practice was abandoned when
This seems to be only a small variation of hashing methods I was
taught at university in the 80s.
The method I always used was simply putting the new value and key in
the place of the old one, with one simple addition. In case the spot
is filled it would look at the next 'n' spots until it
The problem is: how do you check? You'd need twins and have one of
them play Go or Chess.
I even don't know if the intelligence of twins is the same from the
start. When at university there were two identical twins in the same
year. With identical I mean, really identical. They were
On 12-jan-07, at 14:16, Chris Fant wrote:
Plus, some would argue that any Go
already is solved (write simple algorithm and wait 1 billion years
while it runs).
To 'solve' a game in the strict sense you need to know the best
answer to every move. And you need to be able to prove that it's
On 4-jan-07, at 19:37, Don Dailey wrote:
If 2 perfect players played a game where one
was given the 9 stones, and they played for maximum territory
(obviously
it doesn't make sense to play for a win) would the handicapped player
be able to hold some territory at the end of the game?
This
On 4-jan-07, at 18:53, David Doshay wrote:
I see it as perfectly fair that the bot with
the better ability to read, and thus knows it can pass, should be
rewarded for that reading skill.
I think you are mistaken for the real reason of the 'second phase',
where he who passes has to pay a
On 31-dec-06, at 15:34, David Fotland wrote:
A strong chinese player using chinese rules will pick up a point or
two
during the dame filling stage when playing a strong japanese
player. The
Chiense player will choose earlier moves that gain a later dame
point that
the japanese player
On 4-dec-06, at 15:23, Don Dailey wrote:
But it seems like more of a travesty in Java.
Well, this may be subjective. What may seem like travesty to one may
appear completely normal to someone else.
I'm curious though. If you have the time, could you point out in the
code in my public
Don,
I disagree rather strongly with some of your statements.
On 4-dec-06, at 18:35, Don Dailey wrote:
This isn't a Java issue, it's most if not all computer languages - if
you really go all out to optimize your code for performance, you will
sacrifice readability, clarity, etc.
In
On 29-nov-06, at 08:43, Stuart A. Yeates wrote:
Other tricks for faster java include ensuring that, wherever
possible, you use the final, static and private keywords. This
enables the compiler to apply more compilation tricks in more places.
More and more I find that using 'final' or
On 27-nov-06, at 08:35, igo wrote:
It is said if has 4 stones handicap, every Pro will accept games
play with God even if bet his life.
I don't know if that's a generally accpted estimate. But I know that
Otake Hideo once said he'd bet his life with 4 stones against God. He
also added
201 - 249 of 249 matches
Mail list logo
