>> You probably don't understand how UCT works. UCT balances exploration
>> with exploitation. The UCT tree WILL explore B1, but will explore it
>> with low frequency.That is unless the tree actually throws out 1
>> point eye moves (in which case it is not properly scalable and broken in
>
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 04:35:18PM -0500, Don Dailey wrote:
> Heikki Levanto wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 03:23:35PM -0500, Don Dailey wrote:
> >
> >> Having said that, I am interested in this. Is there something that
> >> totally prevents the program from EVER seeing the best move?
2008/1/30, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> It would get it eventually, which means this doesn't inhibit scalability.
>
> Having said that, I am interested in this. Is there something that
> totally prevents the program from EVER seeing the best move?I don't
> mean something that takes a lo
> ...
> That mogo would not know to move to nakade point c1 with either color?
Mogo tends to get confused on nakade positions when there are still
external liberties. Here is my report on this with a couple of examples:
http://computer-go.org/pipermail/computer-go/2007-October/011327.html
If I'v
Are you kidding? That's based on only 10 games.
Hideki Kato wrote:
Don Dailey: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
About Don's arguments on self testing:
I would agree at 100% if it wasn't for the known limitations:
Nakade, not filling own eyes, etc. Because the program is blind
to them it is blind in bot
Don Dailey: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> About Don's arguments on self testing:
>>
>> I would agree at 100% if it wasn't for the known limitations:
>> Nakade, not filling own eyes, etc. Because the program is blind
>> to them it is blind in both senses: it does not consider those
>> moves when defendin
At 05:25 PM 1/30/2008, you wrote:
It also helps to get good instruction right from the start to avoid learning
bad habits that are hard to unlearn later.
this is really important. i learned from books and some japanese pros
for many years and then met mr. yang (7p). i had a bunch of stiff
>
> I believe you COULD improve as fast as that young guy you are talking
> about, but you would need to do serious study. Not read some books
> while watching television, but putting yourself in a quiet room and
> being totally focused.A 3 dan teacher would help enormously.
>
Agreed.
Don, welcome to my battle last week (or was it the week before?). It was the exact same discussion. I don't know if people are assuming that a typical UCT
reference implementation does not consider all moves or if they just don't understand the difference between a playout policy and a tree node
I agree with this completely. If fixing this problem was just a simple
matter of course, then I'm sure the mogo team would have done so very
quickly.The cure could be worse than the disease in this case.
But I think what we forget is that this discussion has been hijacked in
a sense, because
Don Dailey wrote:
I am concerned that the current study is, as Jacques has so ably
described, a study of a restricted game where nakade and certain
other moves are considered to be illegal; this restricted game
approaches the game of Go, but the programs have certain blind
spots which humans can
>
> Regardless of the exact example, _if_ pruning rules exclude a move,
> then an engine will never play it. That means that for that
> situation, they're not scalable. That may be a big if but will
> definitely affect some bot implementations. Progressive widening and
> soft-pruning rules prob
On Jan 30, 2008 4:35 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Heikki Levanto wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 03:23:35PM -0500, Don Dailey wrote:
> >
> >> Having said that, I am interested in this. Is there something that
> >> totally prevents the program from EVER seeing the best move?
Heikki Levanto wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 03:23:35PM -0500, Don Dailey wrote:
>
>> Having said that, I am interested in this. Is there something that
>> totally prevents the program from EVER seeing the best move?I don't
>> mean something that takes a long time, I mean something t
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 03:23:35PM -0500, Don Dailey wrote:
> Having said that, I am interested in this. Is there something that
> totally prevents the program from EVER seeing the best move?I don't
> mean something that takes a long time, I mean something that has the
> theoretical property
On Jan 30, 2008 3:51 PM, terry mcintyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There are other shapes which are known to be dead. For example, four
> points in a square shape make one eye, not two. If the defender plays one
> point, trying to make two eyes, the opponent plays the diagonally opposite
> point
er-go
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 11:53:57 AM
Subject: Re: [computer-go] 19x19 Study - prior in bayeselo, and KGS study
You're not crazy. Gmail shows it that way too.
On Jan 30, 2008 2:49 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is is just my email client or does Terry&#
li, Speech in the House of Commons [June 15, 1874]
- Original Message
From: Jason House <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: computer-go
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 12:15:04 PM
Subject: Re: [computer-go] 19x19 Study - prior in bayeselo, and KGS study
While bigger examples exist, 4 in a lin
.
- Don
> Alain
>
>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Dailey
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 7:18 PM
>>> To: computer-go
>>> Subject: Re: [comp
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Don Dailey wrote:
I wish I knew how that translates to win expectancy (ELO rating.)Is
3 kyu at this level a pretty significant improvement?
in the order of 90%
Christoph
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.o
Don Dailey wrote:
Yes, the tree generates pass moves and with 2 passes the game is scored
without play-outs.
How do you detect dead groups after 2 passes? Static analysis? All is
alive/CGOS?
I can't believe mogo doesn't do this, it would be very weak
if it didn't.
That's just an assump
Vlad Dumitrescu wrote:
> Hi Don,
>
> On Jan 30, 2008 9:02 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> According to Sensei's Library, nakade is:
>> It refers to a situation in which a group has a single large
>> internal, enclosed space that can be made into two eyes by the right
>>
Le mercredi 30 janvier 2008, Michael Williams a écrit :
> I don't feel like searching for it right now, but not too long ago someone
> posted a link to a chart that gave the winrates and equivalent rankings for
> different
> rating systems.
>
>
Wikipedia have a nice graph to compare all rating
It would get it eventually, which means this doesn't inhibit scalability.
I don't expect every aspect of a program to improve at the same rate -
but if a program is "properly" scalable, you can expect that it doesn't
regress with extra time. It only moves forward, gets stronger with
more think
Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
Don Dailey wrote:
So I think this is nakade.
Yes. Leela 0.2.x would get it wrong [1].
[1] Not eternally, but it would still take unreasonably long.
I was thinking of the 3 point version, not the 4 point version Don
posted, of course. Oops!
--
GCP
_
; > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Dailey
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 7:18 PM
> > To: computer-go
> > Subject: Re: [computer-go] 19x19 Study - prior in bayeselo, and KGS
> >
While bigger examples exist, 4 in a line (with both ends enclosed) is not
nakade because the two center points are miai (b and c in your example). It
requires two moves (both b and c) to reduce your example to a single eye.
Because of that, it is not nakade.
A comprehensive list of nakade shapes
Hi Don,
On Jan 30, 2008 9:02 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> According to Sensei's Library, nakade is:
> It refers to a situation in which a group has a single large
> internal, enclosed space that can be made into two eyes by the right
> move--or prevented from doing so b
Does mogo have a play-out rule that says, don't move into self-atari?
If so, then I can see how the play-out would miss this.
But the tree search would not miss this.I still don't see the
problem. I can see how a play-out strategy would delay the
understanding of positions, but that's no
Don Dailey wrote:
So I think this is nakade.
Yes. Leela 0.2.x would get it wrong [1].
[1] Not eternally, but it would still take unreasonably long.
--
GCP
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/l
According to Sensei's Library, nakade is:
It refers to a situation in which a group has a single large
internal, enclosed space that can be made into two eyes by the right
move--or prevented from doing so by an enemy move.
Several examples are shown that where there are exactly 3
nsure implicit
> obedience is to commence tyranny in the nursery."
> >
> > Benjamin Disraeli, Speech in the House of Commons [June 15, 1874]
> >
> > - Original Message
> > From: Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: computer-go
> >
On Jan 30, 2008 2:48 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So are you saying that if mogo had this position:
>
> | # # # # # #
> | O O O O O #
> | + + + + O #
> a b c d e
>
> That mogo would not know to move to nakade point c1 with either color?
That's not nakade... Even if it was one sh
sage
> From: Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: computer-go
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 11:22:16 AM
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] 19x19 Study - prior in bayeselo, and KGS study
>
>
> I
> must
> not
> understand
> the
> problem.
>
>
Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
> Don Dailey wrote:
>> I must not understand the problem. My program has no trouble with
>> nakade unless you are talking about some special case position.My
>> program immediately places the stone on the magic square to protect it's
>> 2 eyes.
>
> Can your p
to commence tyranny in the nursery.”
Benjamin Disraeli, Speech in the House of Commons [June 15, 1874]
- Original Message
From: Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: computer-go
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 11:22:16 AM
Subject: Re: [computer-go] 19x19 Study - prior in bayeselo, and KG
Don Dailey wrote:
I must not understand the problem. My program has no trouble with
nakade unless you are talking about some special case position.My
program immediately places the stone on the magic square to protect it's
2 eyes.
Can your program identify sekis? Nice examples in att
he nursery.”
>
> Benjamin Disraeli, Speech in the House of Commons [June 15, 1874]
>
> - Original Message
> From: Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: computer-go
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 11:10:01 AM
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] 19x19 Study - pr
omputer-go
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 11:10:01 AM
Subject: Re: [computer-go] 19x19 Study - prior in bayeselo, and KGS study
Is
nakade
actually
a
problem
in
mogo?
Are
there
positions
it
could
never
solve
or
is
merely
a
general
weakness.
I
thought
the
search
Is nakade actually a problem in mogo? Are there positions it could
never solve or is merely a general weakness.
I thought the search corrected such problems eventually.
- Don
Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
> Don Dailey wrote:
>
>> If a nakade fixed version of mogo (that is truly scalable) was
I changed bayeselo to use the prior command as Rémi suggested I could do.
It raised the ELO rating of the highest rated well established player by
about 60 ELO!
I set prior to 0.1
http://cgos.boardspace.net/study/
- Don
Rémi Coulom wrote:
> Don Dailey wrote:
>> They seem under-rated to m
Don Dailey wrote:
If a nakade fixed version of mogo (that is truly scalable) was in the
study, how much higher would it be in your estimation?
You do realize that you are asking how much perfect life and death
knowledge is worth?
--
GCP
___
c
>
> I am concerned that the current study is, as Jacques has so ably described, a
> study of a restricted game where nakade and certain other moves are
> considered to be illegal; this restricted game approaches the game of Go, but
> the programs have certain blind spots which humans can and do
I am, sadly, in the 9 kyu AGA range, yet can regularly create situations which
Mogo cannot read on a 19x19 board. Harder to do on a 9x9 board, but I have done
it.
Don asks how significant a jump of 3 kyu is. On a 19x19 board, one with a 3 kyu
advantage can give a 3 stone handicap to the weaker
> I
would
agree
at
100%
if
it
wasn't
for
the
known
limitations:
> Nakade,
not
filling
own
eyes,
etc.
Because
the
program
is
blind
> to
them
it
is
blind
in
both
senses:
it
does
not
consider
those
> moves
when
defending,
but
it
does
not
consider
them
when
at
Jacques Basaldúa wrote:
> Dave Hillis wrote:
>
> > I've noticed this in games on KGS; a lot of people lose games
> > with generous time limits because they, rashly, try to keep up
> > with my dumb but very fast bot and make blunders.
>
> What Don says about humans scaling applies to humans making
Dave,
I really thought about mentioning that in my original post because it
does affect the ability of human players. In fact one technique I
use when I'm losing badly in chess is to start playing instantly.I
have actually salvaged a few games that way - the opponent starts
playing fast an
Dave Hillis wrote:
> I've noticed this in games on KGS; a lot of people lose games
> with generous time limits because they, rashly, try to keep up
> with my dumb but very fast bot and make blunders.
What Don says about humans scaling applies to humans making
an effort to use the time they have,
> From: Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ...
> > Rémi Coulom wrote:
> > ...
> > Instead of playing UCT bot vs UCT bot, I am thinking about running a
> > scaling experiment against humans on KGS. I'll probably start with 2k,
> > 8k, 16k, and 32k playouts.
> That would be a great experiment. Ther
Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Dailey
> Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 7:18 PM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] 19x19 Study - prior in bayeselo, and KGS
> study
>
> I wish I knew how that t
I don't feel like searching for it right now, but not too long ago someone posted a link to a chart that gave the winrates and equivalent rankings for different
rating systems.
Don Dailey wrote:
I wish I knew how that translates to win expectancy (ELO rating.)Is
3 kyu at this level a prett
I wish I knew how that translates to win expectancy (ELO rating.)Is
3 kyu at this level a pretty significant improvement?
- Don
Hiroshi Yamashita wrote:
>> Instead of playing UCT bot vs UCT bot, I am thinking about running a
>> scaling experiment against humans on KGS. I'll probably start
We can say with absolute statistical certainty that humans when playing
chess improve steadily with each doubling of time.This is not a
hunch, guess or theory, it's verified by the FACT that we know exactly
how much computers improve with extra time and we also know for sure
that humans play
Hiroshi Yamashita wrote:
>> What are the time controls for the games?
>
> Both are 10 minutes + 30 seconds byo-yomi.
>
> Hiroshi Yamashita
Good. I think that is a good way to test.
- Don
>
>
> ___
> computer-go mailing list
> computer-go@computer
What are the time controls for the games?
Both are 10 minutes + 30 seconds byo-yomi.
Hiroshi Yamashita
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
What are the time controls for the games?
- Don
Hiroshi Yamashita wrote:
>> Instead of playing UCT bot vs UCT bot, I am thinking about running a
>> scaling experiment against humans on KGS. I'll probably start with
>> 2k, 8k, 16k, and 32k playouts.
>
> I have a result on KGS.
>
> AyaMC 6k (5.9k
Rémi Coulom wrote:
> Don Dailey wrote:
>> They seem under-rated to me also. Bayeselo pushes the ratings together
>> because that is apparently a valid initial assumption. With enough
>> games I believe that effect goes away.
>>
>> I could test that theory with some work.Unless there is a
Instead of playing UCT bot vs UCT bot, I am thinking about running a
scaling experiment against humans on KGS. I'll probably start with 2k,
8k, 16k, and 32k playouts.
I have a result on KGS.
AyaMC 6k (5.9k) 16po http://www.gokgs.com/graphPage.jsp?user=AyaMC
AyaMC2 9k (8.4k) 1po http:
Don Dailey wrote:
They seem under-rated to me also. Bayeselo pushes the ratings together
because that is apparently a valid initial assumption. With enough
games I believe that effect goes away.
I could test that theory with some work.Unless there is a way to
turn that off in bayelo (I d
59 matches
Mail list logo
