Re: [computer-go] Anchor Player
Vlad Dumitrescu wrote: The best move may be a somewhat risky invasion - of course one has to assume the partner will not play perfectly, but everybody does that every time anyway, right? Otherwise nobody would have any hope to win and so nobody would play. I agree. That's easy for humans to understand. An unclear invasion is a blunder against a strong opponent but it is not against a weak one if you can trust your know-how to keep invading stones alive. But the point is how difficult it is for a computer to grasp subtlety. I think, but don't know, that MC will more naturally find the right measure of overplay than other approaches. It is a terribly bad idea to make a go program an adventurer. Therefore, prudent programs will always be underrated when they give handicap. They could achieve more if they underestimated their opponent assuming that handicap is given because they are stronger. Note that the best moment for overplay is the beginning, wait and see is not a good idea, the sharper the moyo is traced, the harder it is to invade. Later is too late. Jacques. PD Errata (in my previous post) 200 points = 1/(1+10^.50) = 0.3204 approx = 1/4 should be: 200 points = 1/(1+10^.50) = 0.2402 approx = 1/4 ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Anchor Player. ELO / handicap
Le lundi 25 décembre 2006 00:46, Don Dailey a écrit : On Sun, 2006-12-24 at 13:54 -0800, David Fotland wrote: There is no fixed relationship between ELO and handicap stones. Stronger players have less variation in their play, so a handicap stone is worth more ELO points for a stronger player than a weaker player. What you say is consistent with what I've heard from other sources. My understanding is that in ELO terms the ranks are compressed at the higher levels and spread out at lower levels. So there is less difference between 4 dan and 5 dan than 15 kyu and 16 kyu for instance. If I want to use ELO and also expect the handicaps to be fair, then I will need to account for this curve. Current KGS ranking seems very close to european ranking, so stats at http://gemma.ujf.cas.cz/~cieply/GO/statev.html can give usefull hint. GNU and other strong programs are in the range 10k-6k where the stats are rather regular, and rougly gives the follwowing winning percentage in even games (from more than 2 games) R + 1 R + 2 R + 3 R + 4 win% 44 403020 Equiv-ELO -43 -72 -149 -240 So a linear interpolation (even if it obviously not linear) gives approximately 50 ELO == 1 handi (for this range of strenght) On the web I see that some ELO based GO servers assume 100 ELO is 1 rank, and do exactly what I proposed, when they handicap they fold this into the ELO rating of the players for rating purposes. So taking 100 ELO for 1 k difference seems to be a good first guess, and gives slightly less handi than needed (this is good idea), and currently no one knows how bot ranking will look like ... Alain ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Anchor Player. High handi
Le lundi 25 décembre 2006 15:35, Jacques Basaldúa a écrit : I have seen (many times) GnuGo not being able to win a H7 game to an opponent more than 10 kyu weaker. That happens because it had to invade unclear positions. This is a feature of GNU Go :-) GNU Go has very small invasion capacity, and this is done on purpose, because it is too weak at making light plays, or move like escape-or-live. GNU is tuned for even games on 19X19, and so behaves far from optimal in high handicap games. Alain ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Anchor Player
On 12/26/06, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, the answer is that there is no gtp command available that defines whether handicap stones are also compensated or by how much. Just like there's no GTP command to define the ruleset. This compensation is 0 in japanese rules, N in chinese rules, N-1 in AGA rules, etc. So it seems more or less clearly defined by the ruleset used. CGOS 9x9 uses a modified Tromp-Taylor right ? What does this ruleset say about such compensation ? If it says nothing, let's just choose between N and N-1 (since a compensation is logical when area scoring is used), and add it to the set of input parameters that the operators have to pass off-line (out of the GTP stream). -- nando ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Anchor Player
On 12/26/06, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, that's my plan.I'm going to use fixed handicap and 1 stone compensation per handicap stone. One question I have - is compensation normally given in the 1 stone case? I believe, no. Also, in the case of NO handicap, what komi is normally given in 19x19 Chinese? 6.5, 7.5 ??? It's 7.5 -- nando ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
