On Dec 13, 2007, at 9:46 AM, Don Dailey wrote:
I suspect there is more than 100 ELO between ranks at 9x9.
Me too ...
Christoph
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
On Dec 14, 2007 10:55 AM, Nick Wedd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'll bet that if someone ever does write a go-playing program that
> adapts its play in the light of what happens in the games it plays, I'll
> eventually be able to train it to make some _really_ bad moves.
That trick works again
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, terry mcintyre
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
- Original Message
From: Rémi Coulom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For instance, against computers, I estimate that Crazy Stone improved
about 3 stones between this summer and now. But it clearly did not
improve 3 stones o
Hi. My program greenpeep is currently UCT-based, with some MoGo-like
enhancements and some additional learning.
I described it more here:
http://computer-go.org/pipermail/computer-go/2007-October/011438.html
http://computer-go.org/pipermail/computer-go/2007-November/011865.html
Regarding the curr
>
> What I mean is that if human player H beats computer C1 65% of the
> time, and computer C2 also beats computer C1 65% of the time, then I
> would expect that H would be stronger than C2, especially if both C1
> and C2 are MC programs. If it is the case, then it would make it
> difficult to com
- Original Message
From: Rémi Coulom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For instance, against computers, I estimate that Crazy Stone improved
> about 3 stones between this summer and now. But it clearly did not
> improve 3 stones on KGS. I vaguely remember that Sylvain also noticed
> that MoGo coul
Don Dailey wrote:
I don't really know what you mean by "one-dimensional." My
understanding of playing strength is that it's not one-dimensional
meaning that it is foiled by in-transitivities between players with
different styles.You may be able to beat me, but I might be able to
beat someo
On Dec 13, 2007 4:51 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do you have a suggestion for a specific mechanism for this?
I was mostly just thinking a file that cgos looks for that includes bot
names and the preferences. The don't play list would need obvious
restrictions like what you've al
Are you suggesting a mechanism that allows you to turn this off and on
at will and that is separate from the naming and password convention?
One thing I definitely would not do is allow you to select opponents you
prefer to play or not to play - whatever control we have will be limited
to our o
Regarding correspondance with human ranks, and handicap value, I cannot
tell yet. It is very clear to me that the Elo-rating model is very wrong
for the game of Go, because strength is not one-dimensional, especially
when mixing bots and humans. The best way to evaluate a bot in terms of
human rati
On Dec 13, 2007 4:01 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't want to add more mechanisms. You can build your own mechanism
> by making your own password naming convention or bot naming
> convention.For instance you can use the underscore character to
> build separate families of
I don't want to add more mechanisms. You can build your own mechanism
by making your own password naming convention or bot naming
convention.For instance you can use the underscore character to
build separate families of bots and still keep your own branding.
We might at some point make a w
> On Dec 13, 2007 3:09 PM, David Fotland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Isn't Greenpeep an alpha-beta searcher, not UCT/MC?
>
> I could have sworn I heard it described as UCT/MC with MoGo-like
> enhancements.
>
Same here.
___
computer-go mailing list
com
On Dec 13, 2007 3:09 PM, David Fotland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Isn't Greenpeep an alpha-beta searcher, not UCT/MC?
I could have sworn I heard it described as UCT/MC with MoGo-like
enhancements.
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.
On Dec 13, 2007 2:37 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am considering to enforce this basic protocol on the server soon:
>
> Programs of the same "family" will not be paired against each other.
>
I frequently look at the games between my bot version more than I look at
them with
David Fotland wrote:
> Isn't Greenpeep an alpha-beta searcher, not UCT/MC?
>
> Since Go ranks are based an handicap stones, and 100 ELO points implies a
> particular winning percentage, it would be an unlikely coincidence if 1 rank
> is 100 ELO points. Any web site that claims this must be wrong
Isn't Greenpeep an alpha-beta searcher, not UCT/MC?
Since Go ranks are based an handicap stones, and 100 ELO points implies a
particular winning percentage, it would be an unlikely coincidence if 1 rank
is 100 ELO points. Any web site that claims this must be wrong :) and
should have little credi
Hi Rémi ,
Rémi Coulom: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Don Dailey wrote:
>> It would be great if you would provide recommendations for a simple
>> conversion formula when you are ready based on this study. Also,
>> if you have any suggestions in general for CGOS ratings the
>> cgos-developers would be
From time to time I have put highly experimental and very different
programs on CGOS and I don't care if they play themselves
What I meant to say is that I don't care if they play other programs of
mine.
- Don
Don Dailey wrote:
> I am considering to enforce this basic protocol on the s
I am considering to enforce this basic protocol on the server soon:
Programs of the same "family" will not be paired against each other.
A family of programs have the same name up to the first hyphen and the
same password.
So if I have these programs:
Name password
--
Don Dailey wrote:
It would be great if you would provide recommendations for a simple
conversion formula when you are ready based on this study. Also,
if you have any suggestions in general for CGOS ratings the
cgos-developers would be willing to listen to your suggestions.
- Don
My sugges
Hideki Kato wrote:
> Hi Don,
>
> There are not enough evidence to believe this.
>
I realize that - and I don't expect it to be perfect. But it's a
starting point.I would like to put something up pretty soon just to
have something to debate about :-) Seriously, if we make some kind
o
Hi Don,
There are not enough evidence to believe this.
Tast-3k has too few matches against each program, less than ten games
and has no matches against strongest programs including Crazy Stone,
MoGo and greenpeep. In addition, there seems some bias, that is,
his winning rate against gnugo-3.7
It would be great if you would provide recommendations for a simple
conversion formula when you are ready based on this study. Also,
if you have any suggestions in general for CGOS ratings the
cgos-developers would be willing to listen to your suggestions.
- Don
Rémi Coulom wrote:
> Don D
Don Dailey wrote:
We may be able to borrow KGS data of well established players playing
9x9 games against each other to estimate this. Would anyone like to
volunteer to do this?
Bill Shubert kindly provided this data to me. I am working on a study
about rating systems for the game of Go. I
I'm going to estimate that 100 ELO is roughly 1 rank based on this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_ranks_and_ratings
This may not hold for 9x9.If a 1 kyu beats a 2kyu about 64% of the
time in an even game at 19x19, it doesn't imply that he will do the
same at 9x9, but until I have a r
Christoph,
Your bayeselo rating is 1942 on CGOS. I compiled a table that has
all players with 50 games or more which can be found here:
http://cgos.boardspace.net/9x9/hof2.html
- Don
Christoph Birk wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Dec 2007, Don Dailey wrote:
>> Christoph,
>> Let me know whe
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007, Don Dailey wrote:
Christoph,
Let me know when you are finished, what name you are playing under and
I will do the bayeselo thing to get a better figure.
I am playing using the 'tast-3k' account. Right, now I have 71 games
and a rating of 1979 ELO.
Also, I can
throw
Le mercredi 12 décembre 2007, Ben Lambrechts a écrit :
>
> > How do AGA ratings compare to KGS?
> Sensei's Library is your friend ;o)
> http://senseis.xmp.net/?RankWorldwideComparison
>
I believe this page has not been updated since last year change
on kgs ranking scale.
Kgs have the big advant
How do AGA ratings compare to KGS?
Sensei's Library is your friend ;o)
http://senseis.xmp.net/?RankWorldwideComparison
Ben
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
vid
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Dailey
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 6:37 PM
To: computer-go
Subject: Re: [computer-go] Where and How to Test the Strong Programs?
I feel that we probably need several more players to h
le. That's
12 ranks above 2000, with the higher ranks having more ELO points per rank.
David
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:computer-go-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Dailey
> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 6:37 PM
> To: computer-go
&g
I feel that we probably need several more players to have much
accuracy, but I don't mind starting the best educated guess we can
muster - it can be modified at a later time.
How do AGA ratings compare to other systems? Is any particular system
considered (defacto or otherwise) more of a "stand
Christoph,
Let me know when you are finished, what name you are playing under and
I will do the bayeselo thing to get a better figure. Also, I can
throw out any games that were irregular if you can identify them, such
as if a match started when you were not looking or your interface got
gl
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007, Don Dailey wrote:
Are you playing on CGOS? Did you actually build your own GUI for this?
As I wrote in a previous email, I re-used my 'myCtest' program
but replaced the 'genmove' command with a simple GUI. Just took
me a few hours.
I don't want people playing on CGOS
Are you playing on CGOS? Did you actually build your own GUI for this?
I don't want people playing on CGOS as a general rule except under
controlled circumstance for this purpose, but not just for fun.
I discovered that it's easy to use gtpadapter from gogui and play on
CGOS. The only prob
It looks like my (3k AGA) CGOS rating (tast-3k) is converging around
2000 ELO. That gives us a zero-point but we need at least one more rated
player (better more) to get the scale.
If you would like to use my GUI please contact me by private email
at ccbirk at gmail dot com.
Christoph
_
Christoph Birk wrote:
On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Christoph Birk wrote:
On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Don Dailey wrote:
It would be awkward at best. I could build a client to do this, but
the human would have to be willing to sit and play games at the moment
they were scheduled.
You are right ... it's very
On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Christoph Birk wrote:
On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Don Dailey wrote:
It would be awkward at best. I could build a client to do this, but
the human would have to be willing to sit and play games at the moment
they were scheduled.
You are right ... it's very awkward. I lost one gam
On Wed, 5 Dec 2007, Joel Veness wrote:
I have been thinking about making a version of Goanna (~2250 on CGOS)
public, once it plays in a human friendly way.
Thanks,
Christoph
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-
Hi Christoph,
I have been thinking about making a version of Goanna (~2250 on CGOS)
public, once it plays in a human friendly way.
At the moment, it is nearly unusable for fun human vs computer matches
because of a lack of opening book (slow first few moves), and
ridiculous endgame play.
Conside
You must also avoid suicide moves! I also tried playing on top of an
existing stone and it didn't allow that - but any other kind of illegal
move (by cgos rules) is passed through and causes a CGOS forfeit.
There is a config file option, perhaps there is way to configure it to
a particular se
I just tried gtpdisplay and it worked the first time!The only
problem is that I tried to make an illegal ko move.
On linux, I just put gtpdisplay as the name of the program and it
worked.
It looks like it could also be used to watch your program play on CGOS,
just provide a program na
How does it deal with other gtp commands sent to it?Perhaps it can
be used. Maybe Christoph can experiment with it.
- Don
Rémi Coulom wrote:
> Don Dailey wrote:
>> I saw that you made an illegal move!
>> The way to do this is to the take the viewing client and hack it.
>> Then you woul
I was wondering if gogui could be used - it would have to emulate a go
program somehow. But gogui is a controller, not a program.
However I know it comes with all kinds of filters to do various
things. If it can be made to act like a go engine (where a human is
the "brains") then it could be c
Don Dailey wrote:
I saw that you made an illegal move!
The way to do this is to the take the viewing client and hack it.
Then you would get a nice gui and legal move testing (at the least the
package to do legal move testing is there even if it's not being used.)
If you are typing your mo
On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Don Dailey wrote:
But I don't really want humans playing except as a
special experiment.
I agree. But it's an interesting experiment ...
Christoph
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.o
On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Don Dailey wrote:
It would be awkward at best. I could build a client to do this, but
the human would have to be willing to sit and play games at the moment
they were scheduled.
You are right ... it's very awkward. I lost one game by typo
and another by time.
Christoph
I saw that you made an illegal move!
The way to do this is to the take the viewing client and hack it.
Then you would get a nice gui and legal move testing (at the least the
package to do legal move testing is there even if it's not being used.)
If you are typing your moves in manually, yo
On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Don Dailey wrote:
Yes, that would work.
Some humans also could play on CGOS (just for a while) to establish
a conversion from CGOS-ELO to human-ranks.
It would be awkward at best. I could build a client to do this, but
the human would have to be willing to sit and play ga
Maybe it should be an official tournament on KGS. We should probably
make it invitation only for bots and open to 1d+ from KGS. For
invitation, maybe it should be 2200+ ELO bots?
Looking at http://cgos.boardspace.net/9x9/standings.html, that seems to be:
GreenPeep (2550)
Zen (2472)
MoGo (not lis
Christoph Birk wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Chris Fant wrote:
>> MoGo. But it seems that it hasn't been playing recently (anyway, you
>> would have had no idea of the settings and hardware used). You could
>> play against it on your own hardware to understand it's strength
>> against a human, a
On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Chris Fant wrote:
MoGo. But it seems that it hasn't been playing recently (anyway, you
would have had no idea of the settings and hardware used). You could
play against it on your own hardware to understand it's strength
against a human, and let it get a CGOS rating using th
MoGo. But it seems that it hasn't been playing recently (anyway, you
would have had no idea of the settings and hardware used). You could
play against it on your own hardware to understand it's strength
against a human, and let it get a CGOS rating using the same hardware
whenever you are not pla
On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Gunnar Farnebäck wrote:
terry mcintyre wrote:
Some of the MonteGNU code was just released on CVS. Check out Gnugo's
development pages.
Don't expect that code to do better than 2000 on CGOS though
(mgtest2). The remaining code used by MonteGNU is still too messy.
That's wh
On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Don Dailey wrote:
note: this is only to estimate the playing strength relative to a 19x19
player since there is no real system that makes sense for 9x9. I
would simple put this on the crosstable web pages in parenthesis. e.g.
Rated: 2410 (1.1d est.)
I don't
terry mcintyre wrote:
> Some of the MonteGNU code was just released on CVS. Check out Gnugo's
> development pages.
Don't expect that code to do better than 2000 on CGOS though
(mgtest2). The remaining code used by MonteGNU is still too messy.
/Gunnar
_
Let's make a wild guess.What if I made the web site report
approximate strength using the following formula:
dan = (elo - 2300) / 100
So a 2400 player is 1 dan, a 2500 player is 2 dan etc.
Here is a table:
2300 - 1.0 kyu
2310 - 0.9 kyu
2320 - 0.8 kyu
...
e
From: Christoph Birk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: computer-go
Sent: Tuesday, December 4, 2007 12:14:24 PM
Subject: Re: [computer-go] Where and How to Test the Strong Programs?
Robert Jasiek wrote:
>> Where can one play the latest versions of MoGo or other, similarly
strong
>> pr
Rémi Coulom wrote:
Hi,
13x13 StoneCrazy is currently connected to CGOS (computer go room). It
will stay there for about 24h.
Rémi
So far, it lost 1 game against 3d, and 2 games against 2d. In this game,
it started a nice ko fight at move 69 (but lost):
http://files.gokgs.com/games/2007/12/
Robert Jasiek wrote:
Where can one play the latest versions of MoGo or other, similarly strong
programs?
Would it be possible to publish the MonteGNU code?
If yes, then a few dan-players could play each at least 20 games
against it and publish their results. That would allow for a
rough estimat
At the Cotsen Open the encouragement is a prize for the best program.
It has not been very satisfying for me to have SlugGo win it the past
two years by the default of being the only program present. I would
be much happier to have others show up too. I have heard from one
programmer who says he
David Doshay wrote:
When tournament organizers allow and encourage it!
Some (local) European tournaments would allow it. (Some have already
done it.) "Encourage" - not yet :)
--
robert jasiek
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
On 4, Dec 2007, at 3:59 AM, Robert Jasiek wrote:
When will we see the strong programs entering real world tournaments?
When tournament organizers allow and encourage it! At this time AGA
rules are that games against computers are not counted in a human
player's ranking.
The Cotsen Open
Robert Jasiek wrote:
> Where can one play the latest versions of MoGo or other, similarly
> strong programs? It is said that some programs are on KGS, but I
> cannot find them. How to find them? Is it possible to play against
> them as a human on CGOS? I, German 5d, would want to play even games
Robert Jasiek wrote:
Where can one play the latest versions of MoGo or other, similarly
strong programs? It is said that some programs are on KGS, but I
cannot find them. How to find them? Is it possible to play against
them as a human on CGOS? I, German 5d, would want to play even games
on 19
On 12/4/07, Chris Fant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What I consider more of an issue is that MoGo seems to be very
> > sensitive to (undocumented) configuration options. Such issues
> > probably exist with all engines. It'd probably be smarter to set up a
> > day where strong bots would connect
> What I consider more of an issue is that MoGo seems to be very
> sensitive to (undocumented) configuration options. Such issues
> probably exist with all engines. It'd probably be smarter to set up a
> day where strong bots would connect to CGOS and invite dan-level
> players to challenge them.
On 12/4/07, Chris Fant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Where can one play the latest versions of MoGo or other, similarly
> > > strong programs?
> >
> > But Mogo is now a free program.You can get a copy, find some good
> > hardware and play at 9x9 and 19x19.
> >
>
> But the released version is
> > Where can one play the latest versions of MoGo or other, similarly
> > strong programs? It is said that some programs are on KGS, but I
> > cannot find them. How to find them? Is it possible to play against
> > them as a human on CGOS?
> CGOS is designed for computer/computer only.You could
Robert Jasiek wrote:
> Where can one play the latest versions of MoGo or other, similarly
> strong programs? It is said that some programs are on KGS, but I
> cannot find them. How to find them? Is it possible to play against
> them as a human on CGOS?
CGOS is designed for computer/computer only
71 matches
Mail list logo
