Le mercredi 10 janvier 2007 10:32, Sylvain Gelly a écrit :
Hello,
Also on 19x19 mogos plays also some very slow moves in the beginning of
7 handicap game.
[...]
In 19x19, MoGo only considers local moves, near the move you
just played or the last move it played. It even doesn't look at
I did not try something like plays globally until the xxx move then
locally. Perhaps it should help.
Hmm its probably rather difficult to find the balance, local answer are
very often needed. Good stuff would be : when no local answer is needed,
then take initiative and play one big/global
Hello,
Also on 19x19 mogos plays also some very slow moves in the beginning of
7 handicap game.
I guess that using (average_score / standard_deviation_of_score) instead
of
(winning_probability) should solve both problems at the same time.
yes you're right, MoGo is very weak in the opening
At 16:20 09/01/2007, you wrote:
i'd like to follow this up by saying that i'm interested
to see if anyone has compared winning percentage
in the following two situations:
i) maximize probability of win
ii) maximize probability of win until p_win 1-eps, then maximize
total score among all
I just lost my first game against MoGo on KGS, 9x9, 0.5 komi, I was white.
Impressing!
But as a human, you don't like the useless endgame-moves MC-programs
play against you when they know they win anyways.
In order to make these programs more attractive for humans, I would like
them to play the
: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 4:32 PM
To: computer-go
Subject: [computer-go] Useless moves in the endgame
I just lost my first game against MoGo on KGS, 9x9, 0.5 komi, I was
white.
Impressing!
But as a human, you don't like the useless endgame-moves MC-programs
play against you when they know they win
i'd like to follow this up by saying that i'm interested
to see if anyone has compared winning percentage
in the following two situations:
i) maximize probability of win
ii) maximize probability of win until p_win 1-eps, then maximize
total score among all moves that give 1-eps probability
On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 16:31 +0100, Benjamin Teuber wrote:
I just lost my first game against MoGo on KGS, 9x9, 0.5 komi, I was white.
Impressing!
But as a human, you don't like the useless endgame-moves MC-programs
play against you when they know they win anyways.
In order to make these
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Benjamin
Teuber
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 4:32 PM
To: computer-go
Subject: [computer-go] Useless moves in the endgame
I just lost my first game against MoGo on KGS, 9x9, 0.5 komi, I was
white.
Impressing
But is there other conditions? Could I pass really early and
trick Mango into passing if I wanted to?
A very simple approach works like this:
1. When winning very convincingly in Chinese, play quickly.
2. When losing convincingly, resign.
Your opponent, when losing has 2 options.
What if instead of
territoryBonus = 1/1000 * territory
You use something like this:
territoryBonus = 1/1000 * territory * percentageOfTheWayThroughTheGame
On 1/9/07, Sylvain Gelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
and if it doesn't, then there's a simple formula
for getting a lot more
Hi Sylvain,
I like the way you think - this reflects my view and I posted something
similar before I read your mail.
- Don
On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 17:20 +0100, Sylvain Gelly wrote:
Hello,
But as a human, you don't like the useless endgame-moves
MC-programs
play
I've been experimenting a bit in the area of humanizing :) the endgame.
The only method I've found acceptable is to do something like Don
wrote. I use the average score in the tree to set at new goal for the
search. First you start out with the standard goal of winning by at
least 0.5 pts. But
the
game resolved and they don't appreciate a bot deciding for them.
People want what people want.
- Dave Hillis
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: computer-go@computer-go.org
Sent: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 11:36 AM
Subject: RE: [computer-go] Useless moves in the endgame
A very
.
s.
- Original Message
From: Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: computer-go computer-go@computer-go.org
Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2007 11:36:44 AM
Subject: RE: [computer-go] Useless moves in the endgame
But is there other conditions? Could I pass really early and
trick Mango into passing
... Having the floating goal makes it win about 47%, so a
slight decrease in strength.. but I'm sure a bit of tweaking may
actually make it stronger. The best part is that it now wins by 51pts
and loses by 17pts on average.
It is said that the game of go rewards balance and penalizes
Christian, can you close that 47% / 53% gap and still retain most of
the win by margin by saying that only moves which are less than (5.5
- someFudgeFactor) are inferior?
On 1/9/07, Christian Nilsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been experimenting a bit in the area of humanizing :) the
On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 09:24 -0800, Ben Shoemaker wrote:
... Having the floating goal makes it win about 47%, so a
slight decrease in strength.. but I'm sure a bit of tweaking may
actually make it stronger. The best part is that it now wins by
51pts
and loses by 17pts on average.
It is
2007/1/9, steve uurtamo [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
playing as a human, if i'm behind by 2.5 points, i'll never
know it, even if there is a zero percent chance that i can
make up those 2.5 points. i just don't count that accurately.
Ok I understand that human does not count accurately.
Then just
On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 12:29 -0500, Chris Fant wrote:
Christian, can you close that 47% / 53% gap and still retain most of
the win by margin by saying that only moves which are less than (5.5
- someFudgeFactor) are inferior?
Or can you close the gap by delaying this algorithm until you get a
Christian, can you close that 47% / 53% gap and still retain most of
the win by margin by saying that only moves which are less than (5.5
- someFudgeFactor) are inferior?
I'm not quite sure what you mean, but the gap is so small that almost
anything would close it. ;)
Or can you close the
21 matches
Mail list logo
