I haven't tested this, but my feeling is that it's better to test against
gnugo because it doesn't use uct/mc, so it has a very different style. But
mainly, I'm all set up with automated gnugo testing and it would take some
number of hours to convert to fuego. There is always something to code an
>You have inspired me to put Many Faces back on cgos, both 9x9 and 19x19,
>using just one core on each, so it doesn't take much of my computing
>resources.
It will be wonderful to have an omnipresent omniscient opponent again. :-)
>I'd suggest you put Pebbles on 19x19 also.
Pebbles and Many Fac
Hi!
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 04:09:31PM -0600, Brian Sheppard wrote:
> >By now, I should probably find better reference opponent than
> >gnugo... I wonder if to pick fuego or mogo... ;-) Strength is probably
> >not _as_ important as the variety of techniques used in order to avoid
> >selective bl
gt; From: computer-go-boun...@computer-go.org [mailto:computer-go-
> boun...@computer-go.org] On Behalf Of Brian Sheppard
> Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 3:10 PM
> To: computer-go@computer-go.org
> Subject: [computer-go] Testing Process
>
> >By now, I should probably find bett
>By now, I should probably find better reference opponent than
>gnugo... I wonder if to pick fuego or mogo... ;-) Strength is probably
>not _as_ important as the variety of techniques used in order to avoid
>selective blindness (that's why I don't like tuning by self-play),
>does anyone have a tip?
