terry mcintyre wrote:
IIRC, a few Microsoft researchers did some interesting work with SVMs
and the prediction of pro-level moves. I've always wondered whether
that could be integrated with UCT to narrow the search tree.
Hi,
This is what I do in Crazy Stone:
Andrés Domínguez wrote:
2007/10/10, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Andrés,
You are right about null move of course. The assumption that other
moves are = to the value of a pass is much stronger in GO than in
Chess, yet ironically it's not as effective in Go.
That was what i was
Rémi Coulom wrote:
Andrés Domínguez wrote:
2007/10/10, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Andrés,
You are right about null move of course. The assumption that other
moves are = to the value of a pass is much stronger in GO than in
Chess, yet ironically it's not as effective in Go.
That
As Don wrote, the
main problem of null move is the depth reduction. It hides long-term
threats that the evaluation function might not be able to evaluate.
even with a very good evaluation function, i would think that another problem
(this is likely just restating what you and others have
On 10/10/07, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In GO, threats tend to be very indirect and distant, at least from the
point of view of a naive search algorithm and this is a real killer to
the idea - my feeling is that null move in GO is not workable.
I have the same feeling. Some years ago
I get:
500 - Internal Server Error
I've wanted something like what you describe for running bots on CGOS and
KGS. When I do see the script, I'll see what I can do about hacking in KGS
support to it.
On 10/10/07, Urban Hafner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hej all,
for those of you that also have
Hej all,
for those of you that also have the problem that they have more than one
bot they want to run on CGOS, but only have one bot available: I've
written a small script that automatically rotates your bots (so that
each plays N games). It's available at
It works fine for me here. I hope you don't mind, Urban, I'll post the
script here so that Jason can see it, since he seems to have problems
accessing your server:
#!/usr/bin/env ruby
#
# Run bots one after the other on CGOS. The BOTS variable is an array
# if directories of the bots. In each of
On Oct 10, 2007, at 17:32 , Jason House wrote:
I get:
500 - Internal Server Error
Sorry about that. It should work now (I hope).
I've wanted something like what you describe for running bots on
CGOS and KGS. When I do see the script, I'll see what I can do
about hacking in KGS support
Quoting Rémi Coulom [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Regarding the question of null move in Go, I remember that some
programmers who tried it in alpha-beta programs did not manage to
make it work (Peter MacKenzie comes to mind, maybe others). As Don
wrote, the main problem of null move is the depth
On Oct 10, 2007, at 18:01 , Adrian Petrescu wrote:
It works fine for me here. I hope you don't mind, Urban, I'll post
the script here so that Jason can see it, since he seems to have
problems accessing your server:
Sure! Thanks Adrian.
Urban
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally
It looks like the script cycles through directories, kicking off bots via a
script file. Making that script file do some other server seems trivial.
The trick in my mind is figuring out how to get things to terminate
properly. I forsee two issues:
1. Supporting # of games to play before
On Oct 10, 2007, at 18:30 , Jason House wrote:
It looks like the script cycles through directories, kicking off
bots via a script file. Making that script file do some other
server seems trivial. The trick in my mind is figuring out how to
get things to terminate properly. I forsee two
From: Nick Wedd nick at maproom.co.uk
Subject: Re: [computer-go] Mertin's private 9×9 19×19 tournament
Date: 2007-10-09 10:28:38 GMT
Edward de Grijs grey.matter at hotmail.com writes
Hello all,
is something known about this tournament yet? In
At 02:33 PM 10/7/2007, you wrote:
Found this link and thought you all might find it interesting.
http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/oct07/5552
thread on slashdot: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/10/1758244
---
vice-chair http://ocjug.org/
___
I'm just now reading the article.
Monte Carlo techniques have recently had success in Go played on a
restricted 9-by-9 board. My hunch, however, is that they won't play a
significant role in creating a machine that can top the best human
players in the 19-by-19 game.
The author loses credibility
Of no particular importance I suppose, but did any one else get the
impression after looking at the picture (and the way he is holding the
stone) that he is not a regular go player?
Chris Fant wrote:
I'm just now reading the article.
Monte Carlo techniques have recently had success in Go
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Fant wrote:
I'm just now reading the article.
Monte Carlo techniques have recently had success in Go played on a
restricted 9-by-9 board. My hunch, however, is that they won't play a
significant role in creating a machine that can top
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
He is clearly posing for a picture, this is not a spontaneous
photograph. Notice the Thinker pose.
I'm not a good go player at all, but the board position seems a little
unnatural to me. But it could be my lack of experience.
Over the last few
19 matches
Mail list logo
