2007/10/28, Joshua Shriver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Anyone recommend a free SGF viewer for Linux? I'd really like to find
> something like SCID but for Go.
I use qGo and Kombilo.
--
Seo Sanghyeon
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
Since you mention SCID, I assume you are looking for something with
databasing features as well, instead of just a plain SGF editor. If all you
want is just plain SGF editing, glGo, qGo, CGoban3 are all great on Linux.
As for databasing apps, you can check out the
still-relatively-new-and-under-de
Anyone recommend a free SGF viewer for Linux? I'd really like to find
something like SCID but for Go.
-Josh
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
You're right. the problem was Many Faces was playing at level 3 instead of
10. I fixed it and now Many Faces is taking 5 minutes per game rather than
1 minute. It's rating should come back up now.
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
On Oct 27, 2007, at 3:59 PM, David Fotland wrote:
Because gnugo has time control and when time is short it adjusts
the level
down between moves. I think with th 30 minute control it is
staying at
level 10 the whole game.
But even now it is only using 3 minutes ... it was not short of time
Now I remember - the min-level and max-level settings should be set on
the anchor player
to make it play exactly the same strength, whether the machine is loaded
or not, especially
if the anchor is run on more than one machine.
- Don
David Fotland wrote:
> Because gnugo has time control and whe
Because gnugo has time control and when time is short it adjusts the level
down between moves. I think with th 30 minute control it is staying at
level 10 the whole game.
I just found a time control bug in Many Faces, and it's been playing at
level 3. It should get stronger soon :)
> -Orig
On Oct 27, 2007, at 3:17 PM, David Fotland wrote:
NO, it's because gnugo got stronger with longer time limits.
Did it? I thought the anchor (gnugo-level-10) plays just that, at
level10. How would it get stronger?
When the time
limit got longer Many Faces started taking 1 minute instead of 5
NO, it's because gnugo got stronger with longer time limits. When the time
limit got longer Many Faces started taking 1 minute instead of 5 minutes, so
there may be a bug in Many Faces GTP interface time control.
DAvid
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROT
Olivier,
The web site displays the wrong time-control. That will be confusing
to people. Can you fix that?
- Don
Rémi Coulom wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have just connected Crazy Stone (CS-8-26-10k-1CPU). It uses 10,000
> playouts per move, and runs on 1 CPU. It should finish all its games
> in l
Hi,
I have just connected Crazy Stone (CS-8-26-10k-1CPU). It uses 10,000
playouts per move, and runs on 1 CPU. It should finish all its games in
less than 5 minutes. In my tests, it scores 41% against GNU Go 3.6 Level
10, and 73.5% against MoGo_release3 at 10k playouts per move (the
playouts
On Oct 27, 2007, at 9:53 AM, David Fotland wrote:
At 10 minute time limits Many Faces rated over 2000 and was top of
the list.
At 30 minutes it's 1650. Many Faces 11 was tuned for the machines
in the
1990s, and clearly it needs work for modern machines.
I don't understand that. The anchor
ver 11 does 1 ply search with quiescence so there is no way to crank it up.
Ver 12 uses full board alpha beta, but it's too buggy right now to put on
cgos. if this server stays up for a while, I'll use it for testing of ver
12.
David
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mai
At 09:53 AM 10/27/2007, you wrote:
At 10 minute time limits Many Faces rated over 2000 and was top of the list.
At 30 minutes it's 1650. Many Faces 11 was tuned for the machines in the
1990s, and clearly it needs work for modern machines.
i have a copy of 11. is there any way to crank it up ot
That's a great reason for 30-minute time limits - to encourage new development.
Machines today
are far beyond those of the 90s. Quadcore machines are available for about
$1000 - quite accessible
to many Go players. An enthusiast can purchase 8 or even 16 cores without
taking out a 2nd mortgage
I would not take the ratings too seriously yet, they are likely to have
quite a bit of error in them
until all the opponents have been established.
- Don
David Fotland wrote:
> At 10 minute time limits Many Faces rated over 2000 and was top of the list.
> At 30 minutes it's 1650. Many Faces
At 10 minute time limits Many Faces rated over 2000 and was top of the list.
At 30 minutes it's 1650. Many Faces 11 was tuned for the machines in the
1990s, and clearly it needs work for modern machines.
David
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
On 23/10/2007, Gunnar Farnebäck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A potential problem with an XML library is the internal representation
> of the game tree. For debugging purposes it's not unusual to dump
> reading trees containing literally millions of moves, sometimes up to
> the limit of the availab
Bob Myers wrote:
Many of those complaining about XML don't seem to really know too much about it.
That is exactly my point. I don't know and I don't want to know!
SGF is fine. It has been stable for years because there is no problem at all.
Should we find a problem, there is a straightforward
Don Dailey wrote:
Who is running gnugo 10?You must using the right options. Here is
how I run it:
gnugo --mode gtp --score aftermath --capture-all-dead --chinese-rules
--positional-superko
You can skip "--score aftermath", it has no effect when "--mode gtp" is
used. (Without "--mode gtp
> Many of those complaining about XML don't seem to really know too much
about
> it.
Dude. It's a file format.
File formats don't solve problems. Data structures solve problems.
XML is not a data structure, it is a very loosely specified way to arrange tags.
By becoming so "multipurpose" it h
You should only set one program to a fixed rating.Unless you know
for sure that 1200 is what gnugo 0 will achieve, but it's not likely.
- Don
Olivier Teytaud wrote:
> The anchors are:
>
> /usr/games/gnugo --mode gtp --score aftermath --capture-all-dead
> --chinese-rules --level 0
>
> /usr/ga
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bob Myers
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
Some critics of an XML-based go format seem to be involved in a paranoid
fantasy that they are going to be forced by evil goblins to use it against
their will.
No, that is not the problem. The problem is that if there are two
"Bob Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Many of those complaining about XML don't seem to really know too
> much about it.
The problem with XML is, that most people using it don't know anything
about it and possible alternatives, using XML for everything, even
when there are better alternatives
As I understand it, the problem with JSON is that it is not good at
encoding optional extensions, name spaces, private additions, etc.
which is something that modern XML is good at.
Is there anyone who's used a lot of JSON who could comment?
cheers
stuart
On 10/25/07, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTE
Bob
I'm sorry if you read my message as saying that I'm not in favour of
an XML file format for go. I'm actually very much in favour of such a
thing, which is why I spent two hours getting to understand the
current contender and pointing out some of the issues that need to be
fixed.
cheers
stuart
If these two programs aren't 600 points apart and you anchor them that way
it will prevent the rating system from stabilizing.
You're right, I'll do that.
Olivier
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mail
Some critics of an XML-based go format seem to be involved in a paranoid
fantasy that they are going to be forced by evil goblins to use it against
their will. No, Jennifer, that's not the case. Sure, if the format becomes
popular they may end up having to deal with it, but XML-formatted game
recor
28 matches
Mail list logo
