Hi. My program greenpeep is currently UCT-based, with some MoGo-like enhancements and some additional learning. I described it more here: http://computer-go.org/pipermail/computer-go/2007-October/011438.html http://computer-go.org/pipermail/computer-go/2007-November/011865.html
Regarding the current discussion, at this point I have very little data for greenpeep against humans. -Chris Rosin On Dec 13, 2007 12:09 PM, David Fotland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Isn't Greenpeep an alpha-beta searcher, not UCT/MC? > > Since Go ranks are based an handicap stones, and 100 ELO points implies a > particular winning percentage, it would be an unlikely coincidence if 1 > rank > is 100 ELO points. Any web site that claims this must be wrong :) and > should have little credibility. > > David > > > > > > The strongest bot on CGOS all time list seems to be greenpeep0.5.1 > > <http://cgos.boardspace.net/9x9/cross/greenpeep0.5.1.html> with a > > rating > > of 2621. > > > > This implies it is almost equal to a 5 Dan player - which doesn't sound > > right to me. However, this could be fluky since it is as at the > > extreme end of the scale. It would be great if this same program > > could play some strong humans at the equivalent time control on KGS at > > 9x9 and we could adjust the difference between ranks accordingly. > > > > I suspect there is more than 100 ELO between ranks at 9x9. > > > > - Don > > > > > > > > Don Dailey wrote: > > > Christoph, > > > > > > Your bayeselo rating is 1942 on CGOS. I compiled a table that > > has > > > all players with 50 games or more which can be found here: > > > > > > http://cgos.boardspace.net/9x9/hof2.html > > > > > > > > > - Don > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Christoph Birk wrote: > > > > > >> On Tue, 11 Dec 2007, Don Dailey wrote: > > >> > > >>> Christoph, > > >>> Let me know when you are finished, what name you are playing under > > and > > >>> I will do the bayeselo thing to get a better figure. > > >>> > > >> I am playing using the 'tast-3k' account. Right, now I have 71 games > > >> and a rating of 1979 ELO. > > >> > > >> > > >>> Also, I can > > >>> throw out any games that were irregular if you can identify them, > > such > > >>> as if a match started when you were not looking or your interface > > got > > >>> glitchy or something. > > >>> > > >> Since I added the GUI I lost no games due to software problems. > > >> Only a few "won" games lost to human stupidity :-) > > >> > > >> I will take a break over the holidays, maybe playing a few more > > >> games in the new year, but I guess for my purposes a zero-point > > >> "3k-AGA ~=~ 2000 CGOS-ELO" > > >> is close enough. Unless we get some other (AGA or KGS) rated > > >> players it not make sense to get a more precise rating for the > > >> scale. > > >> > > >> Christoph > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> 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/
