[computer-go] CGOS 19x19 down?

It looks like the server is down again. It's too bad since there were so many strong programs connected. I hope it comes back up soon. David ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-

[computer-go] shodan vs mogo

Attached is a 9x9 game by Mogo ( Black ) versus an amateur shodan ( Joe C., White ). >From the log output, Mogo was unaware that it was waaay behind until move 60. >Oddly, move 60 was a pass by White; there may be a bug in this particular >version, since this would have been a good time to eith

Re: [computer-go] low-hanging fruit - yose

From: Chris Fant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Such guidance has to be fairly subtle, however; it often must take the form > of "if he plays here, do this, if there, do that." > Doesn't the search tree provide such functionality? It does indeed - but there are often forced sequences which can be pred

Re: [computer-go] crazystone, mogo, go4++, greenpeep, valkyra or other strong programs on cgos19x19?

We are working to get SlugGo up again. Cheers, David On 9, Dec 2007, at 9:43 PM, David Fotland wrote: Anyone else? ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

Re: [computer-go] A thought about Bot-server communications

Erik van der Werf wrote: > On Dec 10, 2007 6:48 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> In Go however, even if the fundamental game is unchanged you may be >> playing illegal moves if you are not aware of the superko situation. >> > > And you think superko is part of the fundamenta

Re: [computer-go] low-hanging fruit - yose

> Such guidance has to be fairly subtle, however; it often must take the form > of "if he plays here, do this, if there, do that." Doesn't the search tree provide such functionality? ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.co

Re: [computer-go] low-hanging fruit - yose

- Original Message From: Darren Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Am I confused in my understanding that a weakness of MC evaluation is > that due to its random play it will miss sequences where there is only > one winning move at each play? ... > This was exactly the topic I tackled in this

Re: [computer-go] low-hanging fruit - yose

> Am I confused in my understanding that a weakness of MC evaluation is > that due to its random play it will miss sequences where there is only > one winning move at each play? ... This was exactly the topic I tackled in this article: http://dcook.org/compgo/article_the_problem_with_random_playou

Re: [computer-go] A thought about Bot-server communications

On Dec 10, 2007 6:48 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In Go however, even if the fundamental game is unchanged you may be > playing illegal moves if you are not aware of the superko situation. And you think superko is part of the fundamental game??? In my terminology *repetition*, and

Re: [computer-go] low-hanging fruit - yose

Heikki Levanto wrote: > On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 04:08:48PM -0500, Don Dailey wrote: > >> Would you rather be 95% confident of a win or 90% confident?There is >> only 1 correct answer to that question. >> > > Yes, if you can offer me reliable confidence numbers. We all (should) know >

Re: [computer-go] low-hanging fruit - yose

On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 04:08:48PM -0500, Don Dailey wrote: > Would you rather be 95% confident of a win or 90% confident?There is > only 1 correct answer to that question. Yes, if you can offer me reliable confidence numbers. We all (should) know that MC evaluations suffer from systematic pro

Re: [computer-go] low-hanging fruit - yose

Vlad Dumitrescu wrote: > Hi Don, > > On Dec 10, 2007 9:08 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> /snipped a lot of interesting stuff/ >> However MC play-outs is not horizon limited like this. It's stupid to >> make it greedy because it may notice that winning the big group leads to >

Re: [computer-go] low-hanging fruit - yose

Vlad Dumitrescu wrote: Hi Don, On Dec 10, 2007 9:08 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: /snipped a lot of interesting stuff/ However MC play-outs is not horizon limited like this. It's stupid to make it greedy because it may notice that winning the big group leads to a loss every tim

Re: [computer-go] A thought about Bot-server communications

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Gunnar Farnebäck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes Nick Wedd wrote: When I play Go on a Go server, I do not try to remember the board position. I can always find out what it is by looking at the client window on my screen. When a bot plays on a Go server, it does remem

Re: [computer-go] low-hanging fruit - yose

On Dec 10, 2007 5:00 PM, Vlad Dumitrescu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Am I confused in my understanding that a weakness of MC evaluation is > that due to its random play it will miss sequences where there is only > one winning move at each play? This is the way I am interpreting the > "nakade prob

Re: [computer-go] Hall of fame for CGOS

> Maybe this was clear to Don already, but his message sounds a little like it would be possible to estimate > rating from winning rate and average opponent. It is not. No, I didn't mean to imply this. - Don Rémi Coulom wrote: > Don Dailey wrote: >> Another example I found is the impressive

Re: [computer-go] low-hanging fruit - yose

Hi Don, On Dec 10, 2007 9:08 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > /snipped a lot of interesting stuff/ > However MC play-outs is not horizon limited like this. It's stupid to > make it greedy because it may notice that winning the big group leads to > a loss every time and that some other

Re: [computer-go] Hall of fame for CGOS

Don Dailey wrote: Another example I found is the impressive Valkyria program. Version 2.7 won 92% of it's games, more than even the top rated greenpeep0.5.1. However, the average rating of Valkyria's opponents was only 1722. This is quite a difference. So Valkyria is rated only comp

Re: [computer-go] Re: A thought about ratings.

Edward, We usually associate playing strength directly with the software, but it's clear that this is not really correct. We have to consider the whole game playing system, the machine or machines it runs on as well as the software. CGOS doesn't really distinguish this. To truly evaluati

Re: [computer-go] A thought about Bot-server communications

Nick Wedd wrote: > When I play Go on a Go server, I do not try to remember the board > position. I can always find out what it is by looking at the client > window on my screen. > > When a bot plays on a Go server, it does remember the position. This is > something that programs are good at, so i

Re: [computer-go] low-hanging fruit - yose

Mark Boon wrote: > > On 6-dec-07, at 19:29, Don Dailey wrote: >> >> Here is an example of why this works so well and why your greedy >> approach is so wrong: >> >>Consider a position where there are 2 groups left that are being >> fought over. One of these groups is very large and the other

Re: [computer-go] Re: A thought about ratings.

On Dec 10, 2007, at 11:53 AM, Edward de Grijs wrote: > Nobody really believes ratings are 100% "right on the money" accurate. > > But it's silly not to use the most correct method possible. Ratings > are "a very useful approximation to reality" and you might as well get > as close to th

RE: [computer-go] Re: A thought about ratings.

> Nobody really believes ratings are 100% "right on the money" accurate.> > But > it's silly not to use the most correct method possible. Ratings> are "a very > useful approximation to reality" and you might as well get> as close to that > reality as you can. > > > - Don But then we have to t

Re: [computer-go] Re: A thought about ratings.

Dave Dyer wrote: > Arguing whether method "A" or method "B" rates a program more > correctly is really close to arguing how many angels can dance > on the head of a Pin. Ratings, at best, are based on mathematical > models with many simplifying assumptions. Ratings are not reality. > Nobody

Re: [computer-go] Re: A thought about ratings.

> (p1,p2,h,t,r) [player 1, player 2, handicap, time, result] i should have said that i mean "time" here to be the actual date/time that the contest occurred, since skill can (and often does) change over time. also the p1,p2 should be taken to be ordered, so that we know who was black and who was

Re: [computer-go] low-hanging fruit - yose

On 6-dec-07, at 19:29, Don Dailey wrote: Here is an example of why this works so well and why your greedy approach is so wrong: Consider a position where there are 2 groups left that are being fought over. One of these groups is very large and the other is quite small.The computer must

Re: [computer-go] Re: A thought about ratings.

> Ratings are not reality. i think that we can probably say that a rating system for, say, 19x19 go with komi relative to handicap and time controls roughly the same for each contest (or not, you choose!) is anything that turns a set of: (p1,p2,h,t,r) [player 1, player 2, handicap, time, result]

[computer-go] Re: A thought about ratings.

Arguing whether method "A" or method "B" rates a program more correctly is really close to arguing how many angels can dance on the head of a Pin. Ratings, at best, are based on mathematical models with many simplifying assumptions. Ratings are not reality.

Re: [computer-go] A thought about Bot-server communications

Erik van der Werf wrote: > On Dec 10, 2007 6:07 PM, Álvaro Begué <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> It looks like even under non-superko rules, something special happens if a >> position is repeated, which means that a program should know the entire >> history of the game, or it may accidentally

Re: [computer-go] A thought about Bot-server communications

On Dec 10, 2007 6:07 PM, Álvaro Begué <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It looks like even under non-superko rules, something special happens if a > position is repeated, which means that a program should know the entire > history of the game, or it may accidentally repeat a previous position, even > if

Re: [computer-go] A thought about Bot-server communications

On Dec 10, 2007 5:23 PM, Álvaro Begué <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Dec 10, 2007 11:05 AM, Erik van der Werf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Or simply don't use superko. Normal rules work fine with only some > > minimal knowledge of the last move. Long cycles are not an issue > > because they may repeat

Re: [computer-go] A thought about Bot-server communications

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Robert Jasiek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes Nick Wedd wrote: Chinese: A player may not repeat a previous board position and when he does the game counts as half a win to each player. According to influentual Chinese professionals

Re: [computer-go] A thought about Bot-server communications

On Dec 10, 2007 11:56 AM, Nick Wedd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In message > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Álvaro > Begué <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes > > >It is not my intention to sound confrontational. I really don't know > >how other rule sets deal with tricky situations. > > For long-cycle repetitions:

Re: [computer-go] A thought about Bot-server communications

Nick Wedd wrote: Chinese: A player may not repeat a previous board position and when he does the game counts as half a win to each player. According to influentual Chinese professionals, the superko rule is a fake overridden by the referee ko rules section.

Re: [computer-go] A thought about Bot-server communications

On Dec 10, 2007 11:48 AM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Of course if only simple KO is used, then repetition is not an issue - > you only have to store the simple ko state fen style. > > But none of this is any good for a general solution (a simple text based > position notation.) > > W

Re: [computer-go] A thought about Bot-server communications

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Álvaro Begué <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes It is not my intention to sound confrontational. I really don't know how other rule sets deal with tricky situations. For long-cycle repetitions: Japanese: A repetition lead to "no result". The game is replayed. Ch

Re: [computer-go] A thought about Bot-server communications

Of course if only simple KO is used, then repetition is not an issue - you only have to store the simple ko state fen style. But none of this is any good for a general solution (a simple text based position notation.) We could talk about systems for compressing move lists of course but there is

Re: [computer-go] A thought about Bot-server communications

On Dec 10, 2007 11:05 AM, Erik van der Werf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Dec 10, 2007 4:35 PM, Álvaro Begué <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > In GO, this is probably a more serious problem. > > Yes, there is no such thing as an irreversible move in go. > > Well there is the opening move... (unle

Re: [computer-go] A thought about Bot-server communications

On Dec 10, 2007 4:35 PM, Álvaro Begué <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In GO, this is probably a more serious problem. > Yes, there is no such thing as an irreversible move in go. Well there is the opening move... (unless suicide is legal you can never recreate the empty board). > I think we are >

Re: [computer-go] A thought about Bot-server communications

On Dec 10, 2007 10:07 AM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I forgot mention why FEN is flawed. It's because it fails to capture > the complete state of the game. It records en-passant information and > color to move, but it's does not capture position history so you > cannot detect dr

Re: [computer-go] A thought about Bot-server communications

I forgot mention why FEN is flawed. It's because it fails to capture the complete state of the game. It records en-passant information and color to move, but it's does not capture position history so you cannot detect draws due to positional repetition. In GO, this is probably a more serious

Re: [computer-go] Hall of fame for CGOS

Another example I found is the impressive Valkyria program. Version 2.7 won 92% of it's games, more than even the top rated greenpeep0.5.1. However, the average rating of Valkyria's opponents was only 1722. This is quite a difference. So Valkyria is rated only compared to greenpeep 26

Re: [computer-go] Hall of fame for CGOS

Let me refer you to the bayeselo web site, this is not my work but due to Rémi Coulom .I am simply using his software to build the table: http://remi.coulom.free.fr/Bayesian-Elo/ The score is simply how well the program scored against it's totally oppositi

Re: [computer-go] A thought about Bot-server communications

Nick Wedd wrote: > When I play Go on a Go server, I do not try to remember the board > position. I can always find out what it is by looking at the client > window on my screen. > > When a bot plays on a Go server, it does remember the position. This > is something that programs are good at, so

Re: [computer-go] Hall of fame for CGOS

What is the proper way to interpret the score and opponent columns? On Dec 9, 2007 7:30 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I just put up the improved hall of fame page. > > I'm using the values Rémi suggests and the values look more in line with > CGOS. > > Also, FatMan-1 is fixed at 18

Re: [computer-go] A thought about Bot-server communications

As I understand it, gtp is for one way communication. I've heard of this as an issue when developers try to provide output for the benefit of players (or bot developer debugging the bot) There's typically work-arounds that we use to overcome this. On kgs, to inform the players, the version comman

[computer-go] A thought about Bot-server communications

When I play Go on a Go server, I do not try to remember the board position. I can always find out what it is by looking at the client window on my screen. When a bot plays on a Go server, it does remember the position. This is something that programs are good at, so it seems reasonable to req

[computer-go] Microsoft Research Lectures: Akihiro Kishimoto

Hi all, Akihiro's talk has finally been put online at: http://content.digitalwell.washington.edu/msr/external_release_talks_12_05_2 005/15004/lecture.htm I hope people find it helpful. Sorry for the delay and the fact that he is missing from the video - for some reason the cameraman de

RE: [computer-go] crazystone, mogo, go4++, greenpeep, valkyra or other strong programs on cgos19x19?

Quoting David Fotland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: I hope it will get much stronger in the next few weeks as I wring out the bugs. It's nice to see Valkyria join. Anyone else? Yes, I gave it a try and I might have found the reason it has been playing so poorly on 19x19. My laptop overheat easily a