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 doesn't require too much CPU power. It's Lazarus scaled down to play fast.
That is good then!
I threw in a gnuchess
gnuchess seems a strong go player ;-). So now we are all waiting for this new promising CGOS version, with all the great features :-). Good work, Sylvain
On Sun, 2007-03-18 at 13:53 -0400, Don Dailey wrote: > Hi Sylvain, > > I think what you are looking isn't a strong Anchor player, but > strong players who are always available. > > However, I do want to upgrade the Anchor player too, perhaps putting > up 2 Anchors. I will prepare a version of Lazarus - it will take a > few days. I'm not sure what my goal rating is - I want it to play > as strong as possible but still capable of being set up to run on > modest computing systems. So I will have to experiment. I think > it will easily be at least 1800 - perhaps as strong as 1900. > > You will of course need opponents who are as strong as possible in > order to get accurate ratings. Unfortunately, you seem to have > a monopoly on the strong programs! I haven't seen anything yet > get beyond 2100 or so except versions of Mogo - which go all the > way to well over 2400 assuming the ratings are relatively accurate. > > However, I'm sure that strong programs will follow. > > Meanwhile, Lazarus will be on and off - I'll try to keep it mostly > on. I think there are at least 2 or 3 other programs in the same > range that are not playing. Perhaps they will come back, perhaps > with improvements. > > I think some of these programs are stronger than Lazarus, it's just > that they are running on less hardware. Lazarus is running on a > core 2 duo 6700 and it benefits from thinking on the opponents time. > Some of these other programs are running on much slower pentiums and > still approaching similar levels (without pondering.) Yes, all that > stuff helps. > > - Don > > > On Sun, 2007-03-18 at 15:10 +0100, Sylvain Gelly wrote: > > 2007/3/18, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > I'm not so sure we need to have a really strong Anchor. The Anchor's > > > role is to prevent rating drift over the long term. > > You are right about this Anchor's role. However, to be able to > > accurately rate players, there is a need of opponents not too far from > > their strength. Of course there are already quite a lot of players on > > cgos, but they are not always connected, it is why I suggested the add > > of an strong "anchor" (maybe here the name is badly chosen), always > > connected. > > > > > > > I could also put together a fixed version of Lazarus. Not the > > > 2100 strength version but a version playing at a fixed level > > > that would play the same strength on any computer. I could > > > not run it on the server and I could not run it all the time > > > from my home, but me might let 2 or 3 people run clones as > > > Anchors. > > > > I think it would not too difficult to find volunteers to run it. For > > the next few months, I am sure I can find some computer with some CPU > > time for that. > > > > Sylvain > > > > > > > > > > - Don > > > > > > > > > On Sun, 2007-03-18 at 13:09 +0100, Sylvain Gelly wrote: > > > > Hello Don, Nick, Magnus, > > > > > > > > I here answer the 3 previous emails. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2007/3/18, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > Another possible candidate is Mogo, running at 3K play-outs, like the > > > > > version running on CGOS right now. > > > > > > > > I thought about that, the good thing is the resources taken (between > > > > 0.6 and 0.3 s per move), the problem is this limited version MoGo > > > > seems to be too much "intransitive". > > > > > > > > > Do you think any version of gnugo is suitable as an anchor? > > > > I think gnugo is a very good anchor and very difficult to overfit. It > > > > is good that ggexp is always playing. Last version of gnugo would also > > > > be good. As Magnus said, gnugo is maybe too deterministic, but this is > > > > only an issue if someone try to "cheat" by creating an winning opening > > > > against gnugo (I managed to find an opening which makes 100% against > > > > gnugo). I don't believe it is a practical issue then. > > > > > > > > > On Sat, 2007-03-17 at 18:45 -0500, Nick Apperson wrote: > > > > > > one concern i have is that within a family of programs (such as MC) > > > > > > the estimated skill differences are overestimated. I would really > > > > > > like to see an anchor that uses a different technique. I'm not > > > > > > offering a solution. Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > One idea is to measure this phenomenon to see how much we should > > > > > be concerned by it. > > > > You are right. And the results you have so far in addition with the > > > > results in cgos can assess if it is wrong or right. > > > > I agree it is bad to have only MC programs running on cgos, but do we > > > > have a program > 2000 ELO which is not MC? Maybe a "solution" would be > > > > to take gnugo for example, and give it an advantage to make it at 2000 > > > > ELO (handicap or komi). This would however don't measure the level of > > > > a program against a strong one, but the ability of a program to catch > > > > up on a lost game. > > > > > > > > There is also the perspective of the 13x13 and 19x19 servers where (1) > > > > gnugo will be much stronger, (2) we can have easily handicaps. > > > > > > > > Sylvain > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > computer-go mailing list > > > > computer-go@computer-go.org > > > > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > computer-go mailing list > > > computer-go@computer-go.org > > > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ > > > > > _______________________________________________ > computer-go mailing list > computer-go@computer-go.org > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
_______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
