Re: [Computer-go] Paper “Complexity of Go” by Robson

at the bottom of my Go page http://tromp.github.io/go.html, which also contains an sgf link. Direct link to image: http://tromp.github.io/img/WO5lives.png Enlarging the board to 29x29 allows for a much better final (I hope) look, close to my first attempt. -John

Re: [Computer-go] Paper “Complexity of Go” by Robson

> The hunt for the simplest possible ko gadget continues... Latest attempt at the usual place: >>> at the bottom of my Go page http://tromp.github.io/go.html, which also >>> contains an sgf link. >>> Direct link to image: http://tromp.github.io/img/WO5lives.png Unfortunately not as pretty as

Re: [Computer-go] Paper “Complexity of Go” by Robson

> Hopefully fixed now. Nope. Still no good. White can play O13, M11, or Q11 instead of recapturing ko. The hunt for the simplest possible ko gadget continues... ___ Computer-go mailing list Computer-go@computer-go.org

Re: [Computer-go] Paper “Complexity of Go” by Robson

>>> Direct link to image: http://tromp.github.io/img/WO5lives.png Might be useful for go event organizers in need of arrow signs... regards, -John ___ Computer-go mailing list Computer-go@computer-go.org

Re: [Computer-go] Paper “Complexity of Go” by Robson

>> I have attempted to reduce this y || (x && z) problem to the minimum >> number of stones >> at the bottom of my Go page http://tromp.github.io/go.html, which also >> contains an sgf link. >> Direct link to image: http://tromp.github.io/img/WO5lives.png > > Unfortunately, my ko gadgets don't

Re: [Computer-go] Paper “Complexity of Go” by Robson

> I have attempted to reduce this y || (x && z) problem to the minimum > number of stones > at the bottom of my Go page http://tromp.github.io/go.html, which also > contains an sgf link. > Direct link to image: http://tromp.github.io/img/WO5lives.png Unfortunately, my ko gadgets don't work

Re: [Computer-go] Paper “Complexity of Go” by Robson

> If we call the three kos x,y,z from top to bottom, then a succesfull > White ladder amounts to > (x || y) && (y || z). Which is equivalent to y || (x && z). > So with y currently false, and White unable to flip it, White should > take the bottom ko to make z true. > Black can the make x false,

Re: [Computer-go] Paper “Complexity of Go” by Robson

d instances. However, without a proof this > assumption is still as valid as (1). > > I am curious what's John Tromp opinion on the above. I spent some time thinking about the loss-less-ladder problem, that asks if Black can capture a given white group in a ladder without l

Re: [Computer-go] Paper “Complexity of Go” by Robson

On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 12:03 PM, Marcel Crasmaru wrote: >> White can start one ladder as a ko threat to take back the middle ko, and >> black will then take the top ko. > I claim that White cannot use the ladders as a ko thread because: > - if W plays R4 as a ko threat then B responds with S4

Re: [Computer-go] Paper “Complexity of Go” by Robson

On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 3:52 AM, Marcel Crasmaru wrote: > I've eventually managed to create a problem that should show a full > reduction from a Robson problem to Go - I hope is correct. > > The Problem: > https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tmClDIs-baXUqRC7fQ2iKzMRXoQuGmz2/view?usp=sharing > Black

Re: [Computer-go] Paper “Complexity of Go” by Robson

On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 10:24 PM, Álvaro Begué wrote: > I don't think ko fights have anything to do with this. John Tromp told > me that ladders are PSPACE complete: https://tromp.github.io/lad.ps Ko fights are needed to take Go problems beyond PSPACE. For Japanese rules they suffice

Re: [Computer-go] Paper “Complexity of Go” by Robson

On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 10:30 PM, Marcel Crasmaru wrote: >> FWIW, first-capture go (i.e. winner is first one to make a capture) should >> not be PSPACE-complete. > > Actually this is not obvious. > > If you are able to replace the White Choice gadget shown at page V in > this paper:

Re: [Computer-go] Number of Go positions is itself a Go position

dear David, > To quote from: http://tromp.github.io/go/legal.html > > It should come as no surprise that L19, viewed as a position, is itself > illegal. > > In this absolute form this statement got disproved in my German Go Forum > article at >

Re: [Computer-go] Zero performance

> You can also start with 9x9 go. That way games are shorter, and you probably > don't need 1600 network evaluations per move to do well. Bonus points if you can have it play on goquest where many of us can enjoy watching its progress, or even challenge it... regards, -John

Re: [Computer-go] Alphago and solving Go

> Shouldnt that number at most be 722^#positions? Since adding a black or a > white stone is something fundamentally different? The upper bound of 361^L(19,19) games is from Theorem 7 on page 31 of http://tromp.github.io/go/gostate.pdf, where you will find a proof. As the paragraph preceding that

Re: [Computer-go] Alphago and solving Go

> And what is the connection between the number of "positions" and the number > of games The number of games is at most 361^#positions. > or even solving games? In the game trees we do not care about > positions, but about situations. We care about lots of things, including intersections,

Re: [Computer-go] Alphago and solving Go

> Under which ruleset is the 3^(n*n) a trivial upper bound for the number of > legal positions? Under all rulesets. > Unless we talk about simply the visual aspect Yes, we do. > but then this has > absolutely nothing to do with the discussion abour solving games. If you want the notion of

Re: [Computer-go] It is official.We will see more of Alphago!

hi Ingo, >> “Pair Go” — A game where one Chinese pro will play >> against another...except they will both have their own >> AlphaGo teammate, alternating moves, to take the concept >> of ‘learning together’ quite literally. > > Will the pro players in these games see the evaluations > of AlphaGo?

Re: [Computer-go] Zen lost to Mi Yu Ting

>> (Japanese rules are not *that* hard. IIRC, Many Faces, and all other >> programs, including my own, scored in them > > There is a huge difference between doing some variation of territory > scoring and implementing Japanese rules. Understanding this difference > will get you some way to

Re: [Computer-go] Training the value network (a possibly more efficient approach)

hi Bo, > Let me know if there is any silly mistakes :) You say "the perfect policy network can be derived from the perfect value network (the best next move is the move that maximises the value for the player, if the value function is perfect), but not vice versa.", but a perfect policy for both

Re: [Computer-go] longest 3x3 game

dear Go researchers, >> > Found a 582 move 3x3 game... >> Can you give us sgf? > > I took the effort of trying to format the 582 game in a more insightful way. > I ended up with lines of positions that mostly add stones, only starting > a new line when a capture of more than 1 stone left at most

Re: [Computer-go] Congratulations to Zen!

dear Aja, > AlphaGo is getting stronger and stronger. I hope you all will enjoy watching > the games. Could you tell us if Alpha Go is able to come up with that most famous of moves: http://senseis.xmp.net/?EarReddeningMove Or is it so strong that it found an even better move:-? regards,

Re: [Computer-go] longest 3x3 game

dear Ingo, >>> ... (1 + delta)^(m*n). >> >> This is true, and a delta > 2 follows from a Theorem in an >> upcoming paper by Matthieu Walraet and myself. > > Do you mean (1+delta) > 2, or really (1+delta) > 3? Oops; I mean delta >= 1, so the base of the exponent is at least 2. (1+delta) is

Re: [Computer-go] Frisbee Go

dear Nick, > There's an assumption implicitly made here, which does not accord with my > experience of frisbee Go: that the player will always aim at an > intersection. > > Suppose I want to play on either of two adjacent points, and I don't care > which. If I aim for one of them, I will land on

Re: [Computer-go] longest 3x3 game

dear Darren, Ingo, > Again by random sampling? Yes, nothing fancy. > Are there certain moves(*) that bring games to an end earlier, or > certain moves(*) that make games go on longer? Would weighting them > appropriately in your random playouts help? You could try to weigh moves by how likely

Re: [Computer-go] Frisbee Go

I don't remember if there was consensus, but can repeat my previous thoughts: > 1. What happens with plays unintentionally on top of stones or out of > bounds? Converted to involuntary pass. Note that a throw must have some positive probability of converting into a legal move. This way,

Re: [Computer-go] longest 3x3 game

> The longest I've been able to find, by more or less random sampling, > is only 521 moves, Found a 582 move 3x3 game... regards, -John ___ Computer-go mailing list Computer-go@computer-go.org http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go

Re: [Computer-go] Mastering the Game of Go with Deep Neural Networks and Tree Search

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 1:46 PM, Aja Huang wrote: > We are very excited to announce that our Go program, AlphaGo, has beaten a > professional player for the first time. AlphaGo beat the European champion > Fan Hui by 5 games to 0. It's interesting to go back nearly a decade

Re: [Computer-go] Mastering the Game of Go with Deep Neural Networks and Tree Search

For those of you who missed it, chess grandmaster Hikaru Nakamura, rated 2787, recently played a match against the world's top chess program Komodo, rated 3368. Each of the 4 games used a different kind of handicap: Pawn and Move Odds Pawn Odds Exchange Odds 4-Move Odds As you can see, handicaps

Re: [Computer-go] Computer-go Digest, Vol 72, Issue 41

> You must be kidding about Lee Sedol. > ... > So he was by far the biggest fish Google could ever catch for that > game, for Go insiders as well as for people outside the Go scene. Well said, Marc. In terms of name recognition and domination in the past decade, who else but Lee Sedol should be

Re: [Computer-go] AlphaGo and the Standard Mistake in Research and Journalism

dear Robert, > The number G19 of legal games under a given go ruleset is unknown. It will never be known since there's not enough space in the known universe to write it down. We're talking about a number with over 10^100 digits. > For positional > superko (prohibition of recreation of the same

Re: [Computer-go] Game Over

I foresee a future where we watch Google vs Facebook matches with human professionals providing commentary on their superiors :-) Interesting times we live in! -John ___ Computer-go mailing list Computer-go@computer-go.org

Re: [Computer-go] Facebook Go

> A member of the German forum said, that a French Go player reported on > Facebook, that Fan Hui lost 5 out of 5 games to the Google Go engine. To ask the obvious: Were these even or handicap games? -John ___ Computer-go mailing list

Re: [Computer-go] Number of Go positions computed at last (John Tromp)

dear Mark, > Well, although Dr. Tromp seems rather modest about this result, I haven't > heard of anyone else doing similarly interesting work on the theoretical > foundations of the game. There is a lot of other interesting research beyond counting things. Just to name a few there's rule

Re: [Computer-go] Number of Go positions computed at last

Wow, Robert, so many questions! Many of which I have no idea how to answer:-( > You must have needed 15 or 20 years of research to find the result? Very intermittently though. If it were all continuous, it may be several months of Go research, several more months of article editing, and a few

Re: [Computer-go] Number of Go positions computed at last

> shows how these 57 positions form 13 equivalence classes with respect > to mirroring/reflection which further reduces to 7 classes when > considering color symmetry as well. Correction: that should be 8 (not 7) classes for all symmetries. -John ___

Re: [Computer-go] Number of Go positions computed at last

dear Erik, > I was wondering if there is an efficient way to find the number of unique > positions with symmetrical positions excluded. It's roughly L19/16. That's slightly short, but will be correct in the first 85 or so digits. You just need to correct for the positions with rotational and/or

[Computer-go] Number of Go positions computed at last

It's been a long journey, and now it's finally complete! http://tromp.github.io/go/legal.html has all the juicy details... regards, -John ___ Computer-go mailing list Computer-go@computer-go.org http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go

Re: [Computer-go] Theoretical question

Our paper "Combinatorics of Go" has some results on this, in a rule system allowing suicide. See http://tromp.github.io/go/gostate.pdf, in particular Section 7 on Hamiltonian games. -John On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 10:13 AM, Marc Landgraf wrote: > Hi, > there is a question

Re: [Computer-go] Frisbee Go Simulation

On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 9:07 AM, Nick Wedd wrote: > I was thinking about the ko rule for frisbee ko, and realised it leads to > problems. > > 1. Black takes a ko, White tries to make a ko threat, but accidentally > retakes the ko. What should happen? This was already

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 7:44 PM, Petr Baudis wrote: > On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 02:29:27PM +0200, Erik van der Werf wrote: >> A measure that I find reasonable is a limit on number of threads x >> clock frequency. > I'm not sure this would work well. The #playouts difference between

[Computer-go] Number of Go positions computed modulo 2^64; source code available

See my updated webpage at http://tromp.github.io/go/legal.html regards, -John ___ Computer-go mailing list Computer-go@computer-go.org http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go

Re: [Computer-go] Number of Go positions computed modulo 2^64; source code available

dear Robert, How much computation time do you expect to reveil the complete exact 19x19 number? Or is more research necessary before I may ask this? this computation of the 64 least significant bits was 1/9 of the total effort needed. each such job contributes 64 bits to the answer. regards,

Re: [Computer-go] Tromp Taylor rules http://senseis.xmp.net/?LogicalRules

On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 9:21 AM, folkert folk...@vanheusden.com wrote: Alvaro, Urban, thanks! I've got an additional question. It may be obvious but it is written a bit ambiguous imho on senseis.xmp.net: A player's score is the number of points of her color, plus the number of empty

[Computer-go] The number of legal 18x18 Go positions is ...

669723114288829212892740188841706543509937780640178732810318337696945624428547218105214326012774371397184848890970111836283470468812827907149926502347633 More details at http://tromp.github.io/go/legal.html, including a call for volunteers to contribute computing power for determining what we all

[computer-go] go rules in Haskell

After some more tinkering, I put two new versions of Go Rules in Haskell on my go page at http://www.cwi.nl/~tromp/go.html The simpler one is annotated with the 10 articles of the rules, while the fancier one is parametrized by board topology (like templates in C++). Yesterday, I discovered a

Re: [computer-go] programming (languages) light-simulation contest

Claus Reinke wrote: As for me, i'm really NOT interested in knowing what langage is good for go programming. That's simply not a question i can ask myself, nor anyone else. This question doesn't make any sense for me. Still if someone can get the standard light playout right in less than 10 code

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

On Jan 3, 2008 10:46 AM, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, the KGS rules gives only 1 chance to agree. At one point KGS allowed this to happen repeatedly, but it cause some bots to infinite loop on the server when they disagreed. So I think it's better than nothing, but imperfect.

[computer-go] Re: language efficiency

On Dec 19, 2007 1:00 PM, Jeff Nowakowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 2007-12-18 at 15:04 -0500, John Tromp wrote: See the Haskell implementation of my connect-4 solver, Fhourstones, at http://www.cwi.nl/~tromp/c4/fhour.html You say on that page: On my machine, the Java version

Re: [computer-go] Re: language efficiency

But I have to admit, I don't know exactly how I'd go about implementing a transposition table in Haskell :-/ Perhaps I'll try for See the Haskell implementation of my connect-4 solver, Fhourstones, at http://www.cwi.nl/~tromp/c4/fhour.html regards, -John

Re: [computer-go] Re: language efficiency

On Dec 18, 2007 3:03 PM, Chris Fant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 18, 2007 2:21 PM, Harald Korneliussen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd like to know how well MoGo would have played if you let it think for a week for every move. Only it seems to me that is not possible, because I don't think

Re: [computer-go] Speed of generating random playouts

On Nov 16, 2007 10:05 AM, Chris Fant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Neat. Was the 15-bit version for 81 values or 361? At the risk of putting my foot in my mouth, I don't think there exist 361 15-bit numbers that satisfy minimum requirements (if the floating-point average of any four code

Re: [computer-go] Speed of generating random playouts

On Nov 14, 2007 9:02 PM, Eric Boesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The if average is in my original code_value set seems like a bottleneck here, requiring about #bits (i.e. about 9, since 361 is a 9-bit number) operations no matter how you do it as far as I can tell (unless you use a stupidly

Re: [computer-go] Speed of generating random playouts

On Nov 14, 2007 1:44 PM, Lavergne Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Let elaborate a little more on this. We want one number for each cells : nums = {n1, n2, n3, ..., n81} And we want the following properties : for any a, b in nums : (a + b) / 2 is in nums -- a == b for

Re: [computer-go] Speed of generating random playouts

On Nov 14, 2007 2:00 PM, John Tromp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My solution doesn't make use of that, and satisfies the stronger property: 0 = a_i = 4 and sum a_i * n_i is in 1*nums union 2*nums union 3*nums union 4*nums = only one a_i is nonzero. that was not quite correct. it should say

Re: [computer-go] Speed of generating random playouts

On Nov 14, 2007 5:03 PM, Imran Hendley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 14, 2007 3:19 PM, John Tromp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 14, 2007 2:00 PM, John Tromp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My solution doesn't make use of that, and satisfies the stronger property: 0 = a_i = 4 and sum a_i

Re: [computer-go] Language

On Nov 13, 2007 11:10 AM, William Harold Newman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Nov 12, 2007 at 04:41:35PM -0500, Chris Fant wrote: I would like some language recommendations. Requirements: Among the languages I know something about (which excludes D and C#, for example)... technically

Re: [computer-go] Language

On Nov 13, 2007 2:15 PM, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How does the speed of the Haskell version compare to the C and Java version? The Haskell web site now brags about how fast Haskell is. Not too well:-( Fhourstones in Haskell runs more than 10 times slower than the C version...

Re: [computer-go] Speed of generating random playouts

Yes, you can generalize pseudoliberties by extending them with another field, such that if the (summed) pseudoliberty field is between 1 and 4, then the other (summed) field will tell you if all these are coming from a single true liberty. Can you elaborate on this? Let me pose it as

Re: [computer-go] Solving Go

On 11/12/07, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ok, on 2x2 I get a consistent result now that I implemented PSK. It gives the same result with SSK too. It's a 1 point win for the first player. I'm not sure this is in agreement with other peoples findings. But it appears to be

Re: [computer-go] Solving Go

I just ran my perm application for 4x4 and it's reporting 43,046,721 unique board states and took 2m6.980s. Will try for 5 and 6. seems you're computing 3**(n*n) 3**16 = 43046721 3**25 = 847288609443 3**36 = 150094635296999121 don't you want to exclude illegal positions? -john

Re: [computer-go] 19x19 CGOS

On 10/29/07, Christoph Birk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 29 Oct 2007, Jacques Basaldúa wrote: This can also be done by the programmers. E.g. If CrazyStone is too strong, Rèmi can introduce a CrazyStoneH3 which passes 3 times at the beginning. But not at the first move, to avoid smart

Re: [computer-go] OT: median of a data stream

On 8/16/07, Darren Cook [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Apologies for the off-topic post, but I know lots of people here are interested in statistics and algorithms. Calculating the mean of a stream of numbers [1] is easy: just keep track of the sum and the count, and divide at the end. But what

Re: [computer-go] Re: Amsterdam 2007 paper

hi Sylvain David, Figure 3 in your UCT paper shows the accuracy of different simulation policies. Could you repeat these experiments for accuracy of win/loss determination only? So for each test position, you determine if it's won or lost under perfect play, and then see how close each policy

Re: [computer-go] Re: Amsterdam 2007 paper

hi Sylvain, Figure 3 in your UCT paper shows the accuracy of different simulation policies. Could you repeat these experiments for accuracy of win/loss determination only? Actually the labelled positions are rather end game positions, and are labelled as 0/1 (loss/win). So we already are in

Re: [computer-go] Go and UCT: article in June 2007 SciAm

On 5/24/07, Darren Cook [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: P.S. John, it says the new algorithm can topple strong players - shall we just believe them and say I won that bet? We don't really need to play the games out to prove it do we ;-). On 9x9 they definitely can. I've lost a few games myself to the

Re: [computer-go] Go and UCT: article in June 2007 SciAm

On 5/25/07, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there some kind of bet on this?When did that happen? What is the bet exactly? Somewhere around 2000, I claimed I would not be beaten by a computer under match conditions (eg. 10 games at 1hr per side + byo-yomi) within 10 years. Which

Re: [computer-go] Progressive unpruning in Mango 19x19

Question for native English speakers: do you think this technique is best described by progressive unpruning or progressive widening? I'm no native speaker, but I think using the word selectivity may be most descriptive. Does regressive selectivity sound too weird ? regards, -John

Re: [computer-go] Amsterdam paper

On 5/19/07, Thomas Wolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here is another Amsterdam paper on Go, although about life death and not full game playing. I may be missing the obvious, but in Section 4.2, Diagram 13, isn't Black 10 a basic ko violation? regards, -John

Re: [computer-go] KO in Hashtable-UCT?

On 5/18/07, Peter Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It took me a long time to get around my mental block and accept the advice of everyone here, but your intuition is correct: superko is so rare, and so expensive to detect, that you should NOT check for it on every move. In dimwit, we check for

Re: [computer-go] 12th Computer Olympiad

On 4/5/07, Chaslot G (MICC) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The workshop will be held on Friday 15. - Sunday 16. June 2007. Must be a leap Saturday... regards, -John ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org

Re: [computer-go] KGS Computer Go tournaments

dear Nick, I am considering postponing the MAY KGS bot tournament from Sunday MAY 6th (in the UK, this is the Spring Bank Holiday) to Sunday MAY 13th.Will this inconvenience anyone? It might be a nice thing to watch on my birthday:-) I might even participate... regards, -John

[computer-go] pseudoliberties

Out of curiosity, Is 88 the maximum number of pseuoliberties a string can have on 9x9? (it should be safe to use only 6 bits in practice, if you need every last bit:) regards, -John ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org

[computer-go] Re: pseudoliberties

On 3/29/07, John Tromp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is 88 the maximum number of pseuoliberties a string can have on 9x9? Make that 89:-) -John ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer

Re: [computer-go] Re: pseudoliberties

On 3/29/07, Weston Markham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It appears to me that at least 91 is possible: .xx.x.xx. xx.xxx.xx .xx.x.xx. xx.xxx.xx .xx.x.xx. xx.xxx.xx .xx.x.xx. xx.xxx.xx .xxx.xxx. Nice! If you use O's instead like .OO.O.OO. OO.OOO.OO .OO.O.OO. OO.OOO.OO .OO.O.OO. OO.OOO.OO .OO.O.OO.

Re: [computer-go] Re: pseudoliberties

On 3/29/07, Weston Markham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3/29/07, John Tromp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3/29/07, Weston Markham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It appears to me that at least 91 is possible: Nice! If you use O's instead like .OO.O.OO. OO.OOO.OO .OO.O.OO. OO.OOO.OO .OO.O.OO

Re: [computer-go] Re: pseudoliberties

On 3/29/07, Christoph Birk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Jim O'Flaherty, Jr. wrote: What's a pseudo-liberty? And how can there be more of them than there are empty intersections (81) on the board? It is the sum of all stone's liberties in a group; ignoring common liberties.

Re: [computer-go] Re: pseudoliberties

As far as I know, pseudo-liberties are only used for detecting a capture or detecting atari. If this method you suggest has some value beyond that, then I'm interested to learn more about it. But the I have a nice mathematical puzzle for you. Fix some k, say, 81. What is the smallest range

Re: Re:[computer-go] MoGo

On 3/19/07, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm testing a future Anchor player for CGOS. I am calling it FAT for Future Anchor Test! It plays fixed depth and I pre-calculated what level to make it play at 1800 strength. I came pretty close, Fat-25 is playing at 1836 at the moment and

[computer-go] Re: computer-go Digest, Vol 32, Issue 19

hi Don, Are you trying to make a Monte Carlo program? Guilty:-) Since about a week and a half, me and my colleague Alvaro Begue are working on a Go program, which (like many others) wil try to imitate Mogo's success... regards, -John ___

Re: [computer-go] average length of 9x9 MC playout

dear Don, Crazy me. I just remembered why my numbers are not matching. I forgot that what I call the lite play-out version is not random. It's mostly lite but it favors capture moves. Yes, I can see how that will shorten the games somewhat... Is it easy to temporarily turn off that bias?

[computer-go] Cheap multiprocessing

Those of you looking to wring more performance out of your MonteCarlo Go programs might be interested in this article about installing Linux on the Sony PlayStation 3 and programming the 6 available SPE coprocessors on its Cell cpu:

Re: [computer-go] Cheap multiprocessing

On 1/5/07, Darren Cook [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The playstation multiprocessing looks very different: you get 1 general purpose CPU and 6 specialized CPUs. Their key feature is they have 256K of local memory - this is not cache, it is all the memory they can access. Not useful for UCT designs

Re: [computer-go] Fw: Compensation for handicap plays?

On 12/29/06, Łukasz Lew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I did some research and I would like to change my vote. My criterion for perfect rules are elegance, simplicity and consistency. As You know I want unification of area and territory scoring. So here is my proposal. The unification needs that

Re: [computer-go] Fw: Compensation for handicap plays?

On 12/28/06, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just to be precise: KGS does option 2 if you select chinese rules, and it also does option 1 when you select AGA rules. And to be more precise, here is how it might work: Handicap 0- komi is 7.5 and either player plays

Re: [computer-go] Unsigned random numbers in Java

On 21 Dec 2006 21:41:25 +, David Denholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John Tromp [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Or use (r (-11)) to obtain a nonnegative value (instead of abs(r)), I think you meant (-1 1) : (-1 1) is still -1 since is a signed shift (preserves top bit). is the unsigned

Re: [computer-go] language choices

On 12/5/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mogo would also have a memory problem. The UCT programs build trees in memory. My own program cannot think more than a few minutes without running out of memory - so even the experiment you propose cannot be done. Yes you are right.

Re: [computer-go] language choices

hi Sylvain, This could be very interesting! If by anyway I can have an user account on this machine, I can try to compile MoGo and launch it on KGS so that you can easily play, and everyone can watch the games. What do you think? The machine is a central component of the Linux supercomputer

Re: [computer-go] language choices

hi Don, Why can't you just play it live on KGS? This is much more exciting. We would have no way to know if you were taking back moves or anything. (Although I believe you to be an honest person I still like to see for myself :-) If Sylvain provides me with a Mogo version that can connect