Between 9x9 server and 13x13 server, I would go for a 13x13 server if we can
only keep one. On 9x9, there are gnugo, mogo and fuego to test against on
home pcs.

On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 3:16 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> There seems to be something special about 9x9 go for computers,  it's
> very popular, perhaps because it's so much more approachable.
>
> However I personally think it's time to start looking at bigger board
> sizes seriously.    If it were up to me, we would move to 11x11 on CGOS
> but I fear that would be especially unpopular because it's not one of
> the 3 "standard" sizes.
>
> If we were to look at 13x13 I don't think I would want to continue
> supporting the 9x9 server, I would want to replace it with 13x13.
>
> There is also the issue of space and performance.  I think we are
> pushing the limits of what boardspace can handle, especially in terms of
> space.  I can't complain too much because it's a gift that we can use it
> at all but I'm constantly fighting a small storage limit.   I'm not sure
> what the performance issues are but the 19x19 server seems fast and
> responsive in comparison to the 9x9 server.   I do not have any idea why
> this is.     But what I'm trying to say is that we can't have BOTH a 9x9
> and 13x13 due to resource limitations and if we move to 13x13 I think we
> would need a bit more capable server to be happy and comfortable.
>
> I have some contacts at universities that I could approach with regard
> to this, that I have never considered before.   But I would first like
> to see if changing from 9x9 to 13x13 would create a lot of anxiety with
> people.  9x9 does seem amazingly popular and I would hate to "kill" CGOS
> by moving to 13x13 if nobody is interested or would support it.
>
> - Don
>
>
>
> On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 11:48 -0700, Peter Drake wrote:
> > More hardware would help, of course.
> >
> > More data would be good. Particularly useful would be game records
> > (for training) and sets of whole-board positions (9x9 and 19x19).
> > Pattern libraries and opening libraries would be good, too, but
> > incorporating them into existing programs may be difficult.
> >
> > I think the interesting algorithmic area is somehow localizing the
> > search. My team is working on it...
> >
> > The community is quite good. I wonder if a 13x13 CGOS would help,
> > because many of us are doing well at 9x9, but 19x19 is MUCH harder.
> >
> > Peter Drake
> > http://www.lclark.edu/~drake/ <http://www.lclark.edu/%7Edrake/>
> >
> >
> > On Jul 27, 2008, at 6:23 PM, Darren Cook wrote:
> >
> > > I have a strong interest in seeing a 19x19 computer go program that is
> > > at least 3-dan by 2010. The recent jump in strength on the 9x9 board
> > > has
> > > given me new hope and I want to ask people here, especially the
> > > authors
> > > of strong programs, what you now need to make the next jump in
> > > strength.
> > > There seem to be four broad categories:
> > >
> > > * More hardware (CPU cycles? Memory? Faster networking? Do you just
> > > need that hardware for offline tuning, or for playing too?)
> > >
> > > * More data
> > >
> > > * New algorithms (if so, to solve exactly what? evaluation? search?
> > > other?)
> > >
> > > * More community
> > >
> > > By community I mean things like this mailing list, CGOS, open source
> > > projects, etc.
> > >
> > > By data I mean things like: game records, or board positions, marked
> > > up
> > > with correct/incorrect moves; game records generally; pattern
> > > libraries;
> > > test suites; opening libraries.
> > >
> > > Darren
> > >
> > > --
> > > Darren Cook, Software Researcher/Developer
> > > http://dcook.org/mlsn/ (English-Japanese-German-Chinese-Arabic
> > >                        open source dictionary/semantic network)
> > > http://dcook.org/work/ (About me and my work)
> > > http://darrendev.blogspot.com/ (blog on php, flash, i18n, linux, ...)
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > computer-go mailing list
> > > [email protected]
> > > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > computer-go mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
>
> _______________________________________________
> computer-go mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
>
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

Reply via email to