I have a question for the group: How is a miai connection strategy
created for a color enclosed region when their are multiple
enclosing blocks involved with one or more interior defender
blocks? Martin Muller's paper Recognizing Secure Territories in
Computer Go By Using Static Rules and
I have been playing with pure MC players, thanks to Lukas Lew's library.
I noticed that they tend to play silly moves, like putting the opponent
into atari, even if the move is a self-atari as well. Any reasonable
player can see that it won't work. But as long as there are enough
alternative
- Original
Heikki Levanto [EMAIL PROTECTED]
computer-go computer-go@computer-go.org
2007-02-20 09:55 Re: [computer-go] Big board
On Mon, Feb 19, 2007 at 07:24:45PM -0500, Chris Fant wrote:
Here is a completed game of Go between two random players... on a very
large board.
For
Le mardi 20 février 2007 13:10, Heikki Levanto a écrit :
P.S. Was there a good description of what a bot should do to finish a
game earlier - my current ones play to the bitter end, with only 1-point
eyes left. Might as well quit earlier if I can.
Don't play moves which would be self-atari
On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 03:09:44PM +, alain Baeckeroot wrote:
Le mardi 20 février 2007 13:10, Heikki Levanto a écrit :
P.S. Was there a good description of what a bot should do to finish a
game earlier - my current ones play to the bitter end, with only 1-point
eyes left. Might as well
Looks like a fractal to me. Easy to test: just calculate the fractal
dimension (using e.g. the box counting method) over a range of board sizes. If
you find a fractal (or mult-fractal) relationship - and maybe compare pure MC
against one of the variants - you could probably get a decent
Chris Fant wrote:
Here is a completed game of Go between two random players... on a very
large board.
For ascetics, the eyes have been filled after both players passed.
I think you mean aesthetics. Ascetics are guys who torture themselves,
and deny themselves pleasure, in a struggle to
On Tue, 2007-02-20 at 14:22 +0100, Heikki Levanto wrote:
I have been playing with pure MC players, thanks to Lukas Lew's library.
I noticed that they tend to play silly moves, like putting the opponent
into atari, even if the move is a self-atari as well. Any reasonable
player can see that
On Tue, 2007-02-20 at 08:20 -0700, Markus Enzenberger wrote:
On Monday 19 February 2007, Chris Fant wrote:
Here is a completed game of Go between two random players... on a very
large board.
For ascetics, the eyes have been filled after both players passed.
On Tue, 2007-02-20 at 12:27 -0500, Don Dailey wrote:
Wasn't
Anchorman some version of MC?
One other comment about AnchorMan - it's a tiny low resource
program. It's not very strong (1500 on CGOS) but it is a very
simple and fast program. It plays pretty close to full strength
in just a
Not only shiko, but many joseki depend on properties of the edges and corners.
On a torus, there are no edges or corners.
Terry McIntyre
From: David Doshay [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Playing on a torus changes ladders too!
Cheers,
David
On 20, Feb 2007, at 9:29 AM, Don Dailey wrote:
I wonder how
I like the idea of taking away the edges. In fact, the engine that
generated this board are capable of doing that. But not as a torus.
I simply wrap left-right and wrap up-down. This is cleaner, IMO. Go
is so pure. I don't like the non-pureness of the edges.
On 2/20/07, Don Dailey [EMAIL
Actually, I think what I did is equivalent to a torus. I just never
thought of it that way.
On 2/20/07, Chris Fant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I like the idea of taking away the edges. In fact, the engine that
generated this board are capable of doing that. But not as a torus.
I simply wrap
On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 12:21:08PM -0500, Don Dailey wrote:
CGOS uses simple rules, you MUST play out a game to the end, anything
left on the board is considered ALIVE.
Fair enough. At least I don't have to worry about annoying other
p,layers by doing what already was the easiest thing for me
here's my first guess at don's question about how this
would affect the game. my intuition is weak here, but
i'll take a stab at it just for fun.
no edges, no corners and no center mean that
you're effectively playing in the middle at all times.
this should mean that life would be harder to make
On 20, Feb 2007, at 2:27 PM, Chris Fant wrote:
Actually, I think what I did is equivalent to a torus. I just never
thought of it that way.
Yes, it is.
Your picture looks very much like the MC simulations of phase
transitions
in magnetic systems I did while in graduate school. Since that
Somewhere online, I played a game on a torus, against someone's Java
applet that has this option. I seem to recall playing a normal game
at either 9x9 or 13x13, and then a game on the same-sized torus. I
recall the first game as being somewhat challenging to me, (a
beginner) and the second game
How would it look like without filling eyes?
(Something like goboard-kaya-wood-yellow...)
Without filling eyes, it looked a little speckled which gave it an
imprecise feel.
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
Here is a completed game of Go between two random players... on a very
large board.
For ascetics, the eyes have been filled after both players passed.
I think you mean aesthetics. Ascetics are guys who torture themselves,
and deny themselves pleasure, in a struggle to attain
No need for those difficulties, you can play along this board :
http://www.youdzone.com/go.html
On 2/21/07, Weston Markham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Somewhere online, I played a game on a torus, against someone's Java
applet that has this option. I seem to recall playing a normal game
at
I'd be curious on the size of the captures during the game. Imagine
capturing a 1 stone dragon!
- Original Message -
From: Chris Fant [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: computer-go computer-go@computer-go.org
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 10:32 PM
Subject: Re: [computer-go] Big board
The way we did this in the MC simulations of magnets was to
renormalize
the lattice using block spins. A block spin is the net result of
adding up
all of the elements in (for instance) a 3x3 block. It works for this
lattice too,
just using B and W, and the result just being B or W. Just call
[resending; apologies if you get this twice.]
Hi,
This is my first post to the list, so I'll introduce myself: I'm a
software developer and just getting started with playing Go. I read
the article in the Economist and thought that the work on Monte-Carlo
based Go programs sounds promising.
Is there any chance you would take the whole lattice and renormalize it
repeatedly this way?
I have used a 5-block shape like a cross.
http://fantius.com/0.bmp (the initial image)
http://fantius.com/1.bmp
http://fantius.com/2.bmp
http://fantius.com/3.bmp
http://fantius.com/4.bmp
Thanks for doing this so quickly!
But it was not what I was trying to ask for. The renormalization I was
suggesting would make each successive lattice smaller by a factor of
3 in each direction at each step.
Cheers,
David
On 20, Feb 2007, at 8:29 PM, Chris Fant wrote:
Is there any chance
On 2/20/07, Chris Fant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there any chance you would take the whole lattice and renormalize it
repeatedly this way?
I have used a 5-block shape like a cross.
http://fantius.com/0.bmp (the initial image)
http://fantius.com/1.bmp
http://fantius.com/2.bmp
That is correct. Down to small is enough.
But if done all the way to just one pixel it will show the winner.
Cheers,
David
On 20, Feb 2007, at 8:53 PM, Chris Fant wrote:
That is what I initially thought, but when I reread renormalize it
repeatedly, I figured you must not mean that because
But it was not what I was trying to ask for. The renormalization I was
suggesting would make each successive lattice smaller by a factor of
3 in each direction at each step.
http://fantius.com/0.bmp
http://fantius.com/1.bmp
http://fantius.com/2.bmp
http://fantius.com/3.bmp
If you looked for these images within that last 15 minutes, you would
not have found them. They are there now.
I started with 726x726 since that is a power of 3.
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
On 2/21/07, Chris Fant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you looked for these images within that last 15 minutes, you would
not have found them. They are there now.
I started with 726x726 since that is a power of 3.
I meant 729x729
___
computer-go
Hi Sylvain,
Your code says that the value is backed up by sum and negation (line 26,
value := -value). But I don't see any negative values in your sample tree,
or values greater than one. How do you actually back up values to the
root?
Sorry, it is value := 1-value. Thank you for pointing
31 matches
Mail list logo
